This study examines the characteristics of the area referred to equally in the Hungarian and Slovak discourse during the Dualism as \u201cFelvid\u00e9k\u201d (Upper Hungary), and from the end of the 18th century, in the Slovak public perception as Slovakia, in Hungarian as the \u201cT\u00f3t\u201d nation. Although the area is not easy to mark out as a region according to a coherent system of criteria, there are some continuously prevailing geographical, cultural, economic, linguistic and ethnic characteristics that have substantiated a kind of a highland identity. In the 19th century, the region became the scene of the beginning of a parallel nation-building process of Hungarians and Slovaks, however, the regional self-image of the two nations aimed often at each other\u00b4s displacement, had become a source of conflicts. At the beginning of the 20th century, \u201eUpper Hungary\u201d (Felvid\u00e9k) had gradually become a proper name confronting with \u201eSlovensko\u201d (Slovakia) used in an ethnic sense, therefore during the dualist period, the national space interpretations became focal points of the debates of Hungarians and Slovaks on the nation-building process, and on the assimilation and modernization processes. This study is attempting to resolve the dilemmas around inter\u00adpretations of space, and, besides presenting the variants of notions connected with space, it also explores the question of regionality.<\/p>\n
Anik\u00f3 Hajd\u00fa 323.174(437.6)
\nUpper Hungary, Southern Slovakia \u2013 Variants of Regionality 316.347(437.6)<\/p>\n
Keywords: Upper Hungary, Southern Slovakia, Slovensko, regional self-image, interpretation of space<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
This study examines the characteristics of the area referred to equally in the Hungarian and Slovak discourse during the Dualism as \u201cFelvid\u00e9k\u201d (Upper Hungary), and from the end of the 18th century, in the Slovak public perception as Slovakia, in Hungarian as the \u201cT\u00f3t\u201d nation. Although the area is not easy to mark out as […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":929,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"inline_featured_image":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[555,568,540],"tags":[],"post_year":[],"coauthors":[642],"class_list":["post-2523","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-forum-social-science-review","category-studies","category-szemle"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"\n