3 Locating Migrants in the Corpora
3.3.2 Searching using Migration status
Most corpus-based studies of present-day migration have selected terms that relate to the act of migrating itself, or the citizenship status of the person migrating, as starting points for their research.50 Unfortunately, these studies rarely provide justifications for their search term choices. This is perhaps because, as contemporaries of the newspapers they are analysing, it is obvious to the research teams which terms will prove fruitful. It quickly became
49 Glasgow Herald, 9 April 1849.
50 See, for instance, C. Gabrielatos and P. Baker, ‘Fleeing, Sneaking, Flooding: A Corpus Analysis of Discursive Constructions of Refugees and Asylum Seekers in the UK Press 1996-2005’, Journal of English Linguistics, 36:1 (2008), pp. 5-38 <https://doi.org/10.1177/0075424207311247>; S. Blinder and W. Allen, ‘Constructing Immigrants: Portrayals of Migrant Groups in British National Newspapers, 2010-2012’, International Migration Review, 50:1 (2016), pp. 3-40
<https://doi.org/10.1111/imre.12206>.
86 apparent, however, that language change means that some of their choices are not useful when searching nineteenth-century texts.
Search terms such as these are valuable because, unlike nationality-based queries, they do not presuppose which migrants will feature in the pages of the nineteenth-century press.
Instead, they reveal who the newspaper considered to be an ‘immigrant’ or a ‘refugee’, and who they did not. Indeed, as Cohen indicates, ‘who constitutes the self (the acceptable, the insider, the familial), and who the other (the stranger, the outsider, the alien) is the warp and woof of all British migration history and the basic ingredient of British identity.’51
Query Total hits
Alien(s) 22,403
Asylum Seeker(s) 0
Denizen(s) 2,052
Deportee(s) 14
Émigré(s) 131
Exile(s) 15,986
Foreigner(s) 47,395
Immigrant(s) 4,831
Migrant(s) 516
Refugee(s) 12,622
Stranger(s) 67,826
Transmigrant(s) 1
Table 3.1 Frequency of query occurrence in the newspaper sample.
To test these queries that relate broadly to migration status, I compiled a list of potential search terms inspired by my prior knowledge of migration discourses, both contemporary and historic, and used the Complete Oxford English Dictionary historical thesaurus to find synonyms not already included on the list.52 This process resulted in the list in table 3.1. I then
51 R. Cohen, ‘Fuzzy Frontiers of Identity: The British Case’, Social Identities, 1:1 (1995), pp. 35-62 (p. 20)
<https://doi.org/10.1080/13504630.1995.9959425>.
52 This is a similar process of search term selection to that adopted in T. McEnery and H. Baker, Corpus Linguistics and 17th-Century Prostitution: Computational Linguistics and History (London: Bloomsbury Academic, 2017), pp. 123-27.
87 searched for each term in all six of the newspaper corpora. This resulted in the removal of
‘asylum seeker(s)’, ‘denizen(s)’, ‘deportee(s)’, ‘émigré(s)’, ‘migrant(s)’, and ‘transmigrant(s)’
from the list, as each query returned too few results to be useful for corpus analysis.
There are various reasons for the low number of hits produced by these search terms.
Some of them, such as ‘asylum seeker(s)’, seem to be of more modern derivation. Others, such as ‘denizen(s)’, appear to have been falling out of use by the nineteenth century. The meaning of some terms has also changed significantly. When ‘migrant(s)’ was used to search a corpus of issues of The Times newspaper from between 2000 and 2009, the prevalence of collocates such as ‘skilled’, ‘workers’, ‘illegal’, and ‘economic’ indicates that the term now primarily refers to human migration. In contrast, when ‘migrant(s)’ featured in the nineteenth-century press, it seems predominantly to have referred to animal, and particularly bird, migration. For instance, it collocated with ‘our’ in the Ipswich Journal, appearing in phrases such as ‘the bright sunshine has lured our summer migrants to their old haunts’ and ‘the turtle-dove is a summer migrant to our shores’.53 It similarly collocated with ‘birds’ and ‘summer’ in the Pall Mall Gazette, the latter appearing almost entirely in adverts for the book ‘Our Summer Migrants’
by ornithologist J. E. Harting.
After these search terms were removed, the following were left, ‘alien(s)’, ‘exile(s)’,
‘foreigner(s)’, ‘immigrant(s)’, ‘refugee(s)’, and ‘stranger(s)’. As before, I examined a sample of concordance lines of each remaining search term, and their collocates. This resulted in
‘foreigner(s)’, ‘immigrant(s)’, and ‘stranger(s)’ being excluded for reasons outlined below.
Foreigner(s)
As the Miarottini example demonstrated, ‘foreigner’ was used to describe migrants in nineteenth-century Britain and could, therefore, return useful results. However, like many of the other queries, it was as likely to refer to people overseas as it was migrants in Britain.
53 Ipswich Journal, 4 December 1881; Ipswich Journal, 12 February 1888.
88 When it did refer to migrants in Britain, they were often only short-term visitors or passing through. For instance, when ‘influx’ collocated with ‘foreigner(s)’ in Reynolds’s Newspaper, it usually described short term visitors such as ‘the influx of foreigners to visit the National Exhibition’.54
Furthermore, the ‘foreigners’ that appeared in the newspapers were often an imaginary or hypothetical conceit as opposed to actual migrants present in Britain. According to the Pall Mall Gazette, for instance, ‘our old acquaintance [the] intelligent foreigner’ expresses
‘surprise at our English devotion to classics’ and has ‘ideas about Shakespearean drama’.55 The hypothetical foreigner was described as ‘intelligent’ 376 times across the newspaper corpora.56 For instance, a correspondent for Reynolds’s Newspaper, concerned about the under-funding of London’s hospitals, asked ‘what must intelligent foreigners think, to see elegantly got-up ladies and gentlemen shivering on street corners?’57
Immigrant(s)
An Americanization, ‘immigrant’ does not appear to have been widely adopted into the English language until the 1830s. Google Books’ N-gram Viewer is an interface that allows users to map the frequency of N-grams (see section 2.4.2) in Google’s collections of digitised books. An N-gram Viewer search of Google’s collection of ‘British English’ texts returned very few instances of ‘immigrant(s)’ prior to the 1830s when its use increased rapidly.58 In contrast, in N-gram Viewer’s collection of ‘American English’ texts, ‘immigrant(s)’ featured frequently from the late 1730s, a century prior to the first British use. Searching the entire 19th Century British Library Newspapers on Gale Primary Sources reveals that the word was not used by any
54 See, for example, Reynolds’s Newspaper, 11 May 1851.
55 Pall Mall Gazette, 9 February 1865; 3 April 1865; 8 April 1865.
56 ‘Intelligent’ occurred 141 times in the Pall Mall Gazette, 81 in the Glasgow Herald, 64 in Reynolds’s Newspaper, 40 in the Liverpool Mercury, 27 in the Hampshire Telegraph, and 23 in the Ipswich Journal.
57 Reynolds’s Newspaper, 6 June 1875.
58 ‘About NGram Viewer’, Google Books NGram Viewer <https://books.google.com/ngrams/info>
[accessed 13 June 2019].
89 of the newspapers until 1832, and not widely used until slightly later.59 ‘Immigrant(s)’ is not, therefore, an equally useful query over the entire century.
‘Immigrant(s)’ also appears to have been used rather differently in the nineteenth-century newspapers to how it is used today. In present-day use, someone is both ‘emigrant’
and ‘immigrant’ during their migratory journey. They are emigrant from the perspective of the country they leave and immigrant from the perspective of the country they enter. In a corpus of articles from The Times newspaper between 2000 and 2009, unlike ‘emigrant(s)’,
‘immigrant(s)’ collocated with words indicating arrival such as ‘influx’, ‘wave’, ‘enter’, and
‘arrived’. Since the nineteenth-century newspapers in the sample were physically located in Britain, it could perhaps be anticipated that they would, like present-day newspapers, label those who arrived in Britain as ‘immigrants’, and those who left Britain as ‘emigrants’.
However, a search for the phrase ‘immigrants from’ returned results such as ‘immigrants from Britain’, ‘from England’, ‘from Great Britain’, and ‘from the United Kingdom’ in numbers comparable to those such as ‘immigrants from France’ or ‘immigrants from Russia’. That
‘immigrant’ was also being used by the newspapers to refer to British immigration into other countries was confirmed by the term’s collocates, which included ‘attract’, ‘assisted’, and
‘reception’. When these collocates were viewed in context, they related to the efforts of overseas governments to tempt British settlers. For instance, the Argentinian, Mexican, and Brazilian authorities were described on various occasions as doing ‘their utmost to attract immigrants’.60
‘Immigrant(s)’ also strongly associated with the collocate ‘Chinese’, which appeared as one of the top ten collocates of the query in Reynolds’s Newspaper, the Liverpool Mercury, the Ipswich Journal, and the Hampshire Telegraph, and the top 15 of the Pall Mall Gazette and the Glasgow Herald. Although there was a small Chinese population in Britain in the nineteenth
59The few documented earlier uses seem to be misspellings or OCR errors for other words.
60 Pall Mall Gazette, 13 January 1894; 3 July 1875; 19 October 1889.
90 century, every instance of this collocate appeared in, usually negative, articles about ‘Chinese immigrants’ in the United States and British colonies, not ‘Chinese immigrants’ in Britain.
Ultimately, that ‘immigrant(s)’ was used to refer to migration out of Britain as least as much, if not more, than it was migration into Britain, meant that it was not directly useful in answering my research questions. However, it has not been dismissed entirely. When it did refer to migration to Britain, ‘immigrant(s)’ associated with very similar collocates to ‘alien(s)’.
Therefore, although not used as a starting point in and of itself, the query is incorporated into Chapter 4 when pertinent.
Stranger(s)
According to the Complete Oxford English Dictionary, the word ‘stranger’ has been in use as a descriptor for people of other nationalities since the High Middle Ages.61 Although used in this sense in the nineteenth-century newspaper corpora, it is very difficult to tell when the term was being used to refer to non-British ‘strangers’ as opposed to British ‘strangers’, for it frequently related to both. Feldman explains that by this period ‘the terminology of
“strangers” was widely used by contemporaries’ in relation to internal migrants from other parishes.62 ‘Stranger’ also appeared frequently in idioms such as ‘truth is stranger than fiction’
and ‘a perfect stranger’. Indeed, ‘fiction’ collocated 504 times across the newspaper sample.63 Although these idiomatic uses could be filtered out by only focusing on certain collocates, the ambiguity over whether the stranger referred to was British or non-British, real or hypothetical, rendered this term unusable for the purposes of this research.
61 ‘stranger, n. (and adj.)’, OED Online (Oxford University Press) <www.oed.com/view/Entry/191250>
[accessed 13 June 2019].
62 D. Feldman, ‘Migrants, Immigrants and Welfare From the Old Poor Law To the Welfare State’, Transactions of the Royal Historical Society, 13 (2003), pp. 79-104 (p. 84)
<https://doi.org/10.1017/S0080440103000045>.
63 ‘Fiction’ collocated with ‘stranger’ 128 times in the Pall Mall Gazette, 116 in the Liverpool Mercury, 114 in the Glasgow Herald, 69 in the Hampshire Telegraph, 53 in Reynolds’s Newspaper, and 24 in the Ipswich Journal.
91
Final Search Queries
Ultimately, ‘alien(s)’ and ‘refugee(s)’ were selected as a starting point for accessing discourses of migration in the newspapers. The former forms the basis of Chapter 4, and the latter Chapter 5. As discussed previously, ‘immigrant(s)’ is included at various points in Chapter 4, in order to highlight areas of convergence and difference between its results and those of
‘alien(s)’. Similarly, as ‘exile(s)’ was found to refer to a very specific subset of ‘refugee(s) it is incorporated into Chapter 5. Although these search terms underpin the chapters, they do not restrict their scope. As discussed in section 2.3, corpus research is not necessarily a one-way process from the distant to the close. Instead the researcher may receive the most nuanced perspective by shifting back and forth between different scales, in order to examine texts from a variety of perspectives. In both chapters, new lines of enquiry, and fresh queries, emerge as salient and are duly incorporated in order to enrich analysis.
Although the etymology of these two queries will be discussed in their respective chapters, some of the reasons for their selection are now briefly outlined, along with a few initial findings. ‘Alien(s)’ and ‘refugee(s) were found to allow access to a broad cross-section of reporting upon migration and also, when compared, an insight into how newspaper reporting upon voluntary and involuntary migrants differed. Furthermore, unlike nationality terms such as ‘German(s)’ and ‘French’, the two queries do not inherently point towards specific groups of migrants. They should, therefore, provide an insight into who the newspapers considered to be ‘aliens’ and who they considered to be refugees.
Like other potential queries such as ‘stranger(s)’, ‘foreigner(s)’, and ‘immigrant(s)’,
‘alien(s)’ was used in contexts other than migration. However, unlike these queries, when it did refer to migration, it almost always did so in a British context. This made it well-suited for collocation analysis. For instance, when ‘influx’ collocated with ‘foreigner(s)’, articles
92 discussed ‘the influx of foreigners at Rome’ and ‘the influx of foreigners to Paris’.64 Whereas, when ‘influx’ collocated with ‘alien(s)’, all the concordance lines related to migrants in Britain, making it easier to draw unambiguous conclusions.
In contrast with many of the other potential queries, ‘refugee(s)’ had no polysemous uses and always referred to migrants. However, unlike ‘alien(s)’, ‘refugee(s)’ did occur in non-British contexts. This was not necessarily an issue because, as shall be explored in Chapter 5, domestic and overseas refugee coverage produced very difficult collocates, making them relatively easy to analyse separate from one another. Furthermore, coverage of overseas refugee was not discussed entirely at a remove. As will be seen, articles elicited emotional and financial support from their British audiences by creating tangible links between them and the overseas refugees. Finally, the relationship between coverage of internal and overseas refugees proved quite different, making it a fascinating avenue for analysis in its own right.
Nonetheless, although ‘alien(s)’ and ‘refugee(s)’ proved themselves preferable to the other potential queries tested in this chapter, some caveats must be noted. As discussed, although a researcher can use their intuition to detect absences, search-based methodologies can only really reveal explicit results. Since identifying someone as an ‘alien’ involves highlighting their difference, this means that the query will possibly uncover more negative than positive articles. Indeed, as Fowler notes, the very process of providing a group of people with a label or category marks them out as ‘special and deviant’.65 Instances where migrants were discussed with no reference to their migrant status because the reporter simply did not consider it relevant to the story are necessarily excluded from this research.
64 Pall Mall Gazette, 7 April 1869; Pall Mall Gazette, 2 June 1900.
65 Fowler, Language in the News, p. 94.
93 Figure 3.2 Comparative freq. per million words of ‘alien(s)’ and ‘refugee(s)’.
Alien(s) Refugee(s)
Table 3.2 Results of queries in newspapers in the sample expressed as a freq. per million words.
Several initial findings can now be reported. First, as figure 3.2 and table 3.2 demonstrate, the two London newspapers (the Pall Mall Gazette and Reynolds’s Newspaper), both discussed ‘alien(s)’ and ‘refugee(s)’ much more than the other newspapers in the sample.
This is perhaps due to the concentration of migrants in London.66 However, if results were
66 The geographical distribution of migrants is documented by Panayi. Although most groups were concentrated in London, it is worth noting that certain migrant groups resided in other cities in large numbers. For instance, for a period in the middle of the century, nearly 18 per cent of people in Liverpool were born in Ireland. See P. Panayi, Immigration, Ethnicity and Racism in Britain: 1815-1945 (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1994), pp. 52-58. Indeed, an 1853 police census estimated that just 1,900 refugees lived outside of the capital. Police Report (19 March 1853: PRO HO 45/4816), cited in B. Porter, The Refugee Question in Mid-Victorian Politics (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1979), p. 16. Though, it is worth noting that the police census likely only counted political refugees in its ‘refugee’ count.
94 premised solely on the migrant presence in the newspaper’s city of publication, the Liverpool Mercury should feature the queries a greater number of times per million words than it does.
It should be noted that OCR quality can impact the number of results that a query returns, and whilst the OCR quality of the Ipswich Journal was comparable to that of the Liverpool Mercury and Glasgow Herald, the OCR quality of the Hampshire Telegraph was much poorer.
The second finding is that the nineteenth-century newspapers did not seem to discuss migration anywhere near as much as the present-day press. ‘Alien(s)’ could not be used to search a modern corpus due to its strong association with science fiction. Amongst the most frequent collocates of ‘alien(s)’ in a corpus of articles from The Times newspaper between 2000 and 2009 were ‘sci-fi’, ‘invasion’, ‘abducted’, ‘space’, ‘encounters’, and ‘autopsy’.
Although ‘immigrant’ is by no means synonymous with the nineteenth-century ‘alien’, there are overlaps and the former can provide an indication of the volume of present-day reporting upon migration to Britain. In just one decade of The Times newspaper (the 2000s)
‘immigrant(s)’ returned 10,408 results and ‘refugee(s)’ 11,448 results. In the nineteenth-century newspaper sample, the most mentions of the two queries in a single decade occurred in the Glasgow Herald in the 1890s, in which ‘alien(s)’ returned 2,955 hits, and ‘refugee(s)’
1,320 hits. Both results are considerably more modest than those seen in a modern newspaper. It is also worth noting that the volume of mentions seen in the Glasgow Herald in the 1890s is unusually high. All the newspapers (including the Herald) usually mentioned
‘alien(s)’ and ‘refugee(s)’ far fewer times per decade.
This large difference in levels of migration reporting is also apparent when results are normalised to allow for newspaper corpora of different sizes to be compared. Table 3.2 displays the number of times each newspaper used the queries ‘alien(s)’ and ‘refugee(s)’ as a frequency per million words. It demonstrates that on average throughout the nineteenth-century, migrants were reported upon at a far lower frequency than in The Times which, in the 2000s, used ‘refugee(s)’ 13.92 times per million words, and ‘immigrant(s)’ 12.65 times per
95 million words. This finding means that, although there were enough results for the purposes of this research, there were fewer results (and as a result, fewer collocates) than initially anticipated.
Figure 3.3 Comparative freq. per million words of 'alien(s)' and 'Home Rule' between 1800 and 1900.
It seems, therefore, that migration-related nineteenth-century news was much less common than it is today (at least in the titles included in the newspaper sample). To contextualise how frequently ‘alien(s)’ appeared in the newspapers compared to other topical nineteenth-century issues, figure 3.3 compares how often ‘alien(s)’ and ‘Home Rule’, the Irish independence movement, appeared in each newspaper title as a frequency per million words between 1800 and 1900. Although ‘alien(s)’ and ‘Home Rule’ were debated by Parliament and featured in election campaigns, the latter received a much greater quantity of news coverage than the former. The next chapter examines precisely how ‘alien(s)’ were reported when they did feature in the nineteenth-century newspapers.
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
PMGZ RDNP GH LM IJ HPTG
Freq. per million words
Alien(s) Home Rule
96