Biorobotics researcher: To be or not to be?

2001 ◽  
Vol 24 (6) ◽  
pp. 1054-1054 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carolina Chang
Keyword(s):  
Common Ground ◽  
Crucial Step ◽  
Definition Of

Much confusion exists within the robotics and the biology communities regarding the definition of biorobotics and the aims and strategies that characterize this approach. Not even the basic criteria for identifying biorobotic research are being applied consistently. Barbara Webb has taken a crucial step towards setting a common ground from which biorobotic systems can be described, analyzed, and compared.

Rhetoric and Dutch Translation Theory (1750-1820)1

Target ◽  
1993 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 55-69 ◽  
Author(s):  
Luc G. Korpel
Keyword(s):  
The Netherlands ◽  
Functional Approach ◽  
European Countries ◽  
Translation Theory ◽  
Dutch Version ◽  
Crucial Step ◽  
Rhetorical Tradition ◽  
Dutch Translation ◽  
Theory Of Language ◽  
Definition Of

Abstract Due to the influence of rhetoric, Dutch translation theory between 1750 and 1820, like translation theory in other Western European countries in those days, was primarily concerned with the effect of a translation on the Dutch public and the verbal appearance of the Dutch version. This functional approach was reinforced by the definition of translation as interpretatio, imitatio or exercitatio. The translational technique which follows from this prospective orientation is one of adaptation, correction and improvement. By the end of the period, Dutch translation theory seemed to be moving away slowly from the rhetorical tradition, as a result of two major changes: (1) a growing concern as of ± 1780 for fidelity to the verbal aspects of the original within the interpretatio-approach, and (2) a decrease in the popularity of imitatio as a creative technique after 1800. Unlike Germany, translation theory in The Netherlands had not made the crucial step towards a new theory of language before 1820.

Exploring the Common Ground of Virtual Communities

2002 ◽  
pp. 67-75 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vanessa Dirksen ◽  
Bas Smit
Keyword(s):  
Virtual Communities ◽  
Common Ground ◽  
Social Activity ◽  
Virtual Community ◽  
Constructive Work ◽  
Information And Communication ◽  
Actual Field ◽  
The Common ◽  
Research Questions ◽  
Definition Of

A great deal of the literature on virtual communities evolves around classifying the phenomenon1 while much empirically constructive work on the topic has not been conducted yet. Therefore, the research discussed in this paper proposes to explore the actual field of the virtual community (VC). By means of a comparative ethnographic research, virtual communities are to be defined in terms of their inherent social activity, the interaction between the groups of people and the information and communication technology (ICT), and the meanings attached to it by its members. This chapter will report on the initial propositions, research questions and approach of the explorative research of working towards a “workable definition” of virtual communities. It will also present its “work to be done” which will ultimately form the basis of moving beyond defining virtual communities, i.e., actually designing and deploying one.

Linguistic expressions as cultural units

2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 121-145
Author(s):  
Elke Diedrichsen
Keyword(s):  
Speech Acts ◽  
Common Ground ◽  
Cultural Knowledge ◽  
Knowledge Sources ◽  
Communicative Interaction ◽  
Word Meanings ◽  
Cultural Aspects ◽  
Culturally Based ◽  
Linguistic Conventions ◽  
Definition Of

Abstract The paper argues in favor of including cultural aspects in the description of communicative interaction. According to Eco (1976), a linguistic sign is a cultural unit. In order to use it properly, a speaker relies on communicative experience with this unit within a culture (Wittgenstein 1960; Feilke 1996, 1998; Everett 2012). We expand the notion of ‘cultural unit’ by including internet memes found in social media (Shifman 2013, 2014; Diedrichsen 2013a, 2013b, 2019a, 2019b). The term builds on Richard Dawkins’ 1976 definition of a ‘meme’ as a unit that is the cultural equivalent of a biological gene. The paper proposes three knowledge sources for the production and comprehension of these units. The first is semiotic knowledge, the second is common ground knowledge (Clark 1996), and the third knowledge source involves culturally shared cognitive conceptualizations on which word meanings and other linguistic conventions are founded (Sharifian 2003, 2011, 2015, 2017). These three knowledge sources are established through daily interactions and learning processes within a culture (Kecskés and Zhang 2009). The paper characterizes the application of these three knowledge sources for a variety of sign uses. We will also show that a cultural view on pragmatics, as suggested by Sharifian (2017), serves to describe speech acts by identifying their culturally based source. The paper therefore demonstrates that the inclusion of cultural knowledge enables a perspective on communication that goes beyond the analysis of spoken and written words within communities of speakers, as it includes emerging means of communicative interaction in the digital age.

scholarly journals Setting the Common Ground: A Generic Framework for Material Flow Analysis of Complex Systems

Recycling ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 23 ◽  
Author(s):  
Julia Tanzer ◽  
Helmut Rechberger
Keyword(s):  
Material Flow ◽  
Common Ground ◽  
Flow Analysis ◽  
Material Flow Analysis ◽  
Coupled Analysis ◽  
Private Institutions ◽  
Common Basis ◽  
Generic Framework ◽  
Multiple Materials ◽  
Definition Of

Circular economy is currently characterized by various definitions, measurement approaches, and critical analyses thereof coexisting alongside each other. Whether the concept eventually prevails or collapses will depend to some extent on our success in harmonizing assessment methods among public, scientific, and private institutions, as well as across different materials and scales. Therefore, in this article, we present a generic material flow analysis framework that might serve as a common basis for circularity assessment, and test it by means of three case studies. It proved impossible to eliminate all subjective assumptions when transforming a real complex system into the generic framework, especially regarding the definition of by-products. However, by introducing subsystems it is at least possible to make such assumptions transparent. Therefore, adequate comparability across regions, materials, and scales is provided. Moreover, the generic system allows for coupled analysis of multiple materials simultaneously so that interactions between them can be studied, as well and a deeper insight into overall sustainability of the system can be gained.

scholarly journals Collectors on illicit collecting: Higher loyalties and other techniques of neutralization in the unlawful collecting of rare and precious orchids and antiquities

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Donna Yates
Keyword(s):  
Common Ground ◽  
Regulatory Policy ◽  
Narrative Discourse ◽  
The Other ◽  
Considerable Degree ◽  
Wildlife Crime ◽  
Techniques Of Neutralization ◽  
Cultural Objects ◽  
Wildlife Trafficking ◽  
Definition Of

Trafficking natural objects and trafficking cultural objects have been treated separately both in regulatory policy and in criminological discussion. The former is generally taken to be ‘wildlife crime’ while the latter has come to be considered under the auspices of a debate on ‘illicit art and antiquities’. In this article we study the narrative discourse of high-end collectors of orchids and antiquities. The illicit parts of these global trades are subject to this analytical divide between wildlife trafficking and art trafficking, and this has resulted in quite different regulatory structures for each of these markets. However, the trafficking routines, the types and levels of harm involved, and the supply–demand dynamics in the trafficking of orchids and antiquities are actually quite similar, and in this study we find those structural similarities reflected in substantial common ground in the way collectors talk about their role in each market. Collectors of rare and precious orchids and antiquities valorize their participation in markets that are known to be in quite considerable degree illicit, appealing to ‘higher loyalties’ such as preservation, appreciation of aesthetic beauty and cultural edification. These higher loyalties, along with other techniques of neutralization, deplete the force of law as a guide to appropriate action. We propose that the appeal to higher loyalties is difficult to categorize as a technique of neutralization in this study as it appears to be a motivational explanation for the collectors involved. The other classic techniques of neutralization are deflective, guilt and critique reducing narrative mechanisms, while higher loyalties drives illicit behaviour in collecting markets for orchids and antiquities in ways that go significantly beyond the normal definition of neutralization.

scholarly journals Collectors on illicit collecting: Higher loyalties and other techniques of neutralization in the unlawful collecting of rare and precious orchids and antiquities

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Simon Mackenzie ◽  
D Yates
Keyword(s):  
Common Ground ◽  
Regulatory Policy ◽  
Narrative Discourse ◽  
The Other ◽  
Considerable Degree ◽  
Wildlife Crime ◽  
Techniques Of Neutralization ◽  
Cultural Objects ◽  
Wildlife Trafficking ◽  
Definition Of

© 2015, © The Author(s) 2015. Trafficking natural objects and trafficking cultural objects have been treated separately both in regulatory policy and in criminological discussion. The former is generally taken to be ‘wildlife crime’ while the latter has come to be considered under the auspices of a debate on ‘illicit art and antiquities’. In this article we study the narrative discourse of high-end collectors of orchids and antiquities. The illicit parts of these global trades are subject to this analytical divide between wildlife trafficking and art trafficking, and this has resulted in quite different regulatory structures for each of these markets. However, the trafficking routines, the types and levels of harm involved, and the supply–demand dynamics in the trafficking of orchids and antiquities are actually quite similar, and in this study we find those structural similarities reflected in substantial common ground in the way collectors talk about their role in each market. Collectors of rare and precious orchids and antiquities valorize their participation in markets that are known to be in quite considerable degree illicit, appealing to ‘higher loyalties’ such as preservation, appreciation of aesthetic beauty and cultural edification. These higher loyalties, along with other techniques of neutralization, deplete the force of law as a guide to appropriate action. We propose that the appeal to higher loyalties is difficult to categorize as a technique of neutralization in this study as it appears to be a motivational explanation for the collectors involved. The other classic techniques of neutralization are deflective, guilt and critique reducing narrative mechanisms, while higher loyalties drives illicit behaviour in collecting markets for orchids and antiquities in ways that go significantly beyond the normal definition of neutralization.

scholarly journals A tentative useful-for-all definition of “safety” in the context of radioactive waste disposal

2021 ◽  
Vol 1 ◽  
pp. 195-196
Author(s):  
Stephan Hotzel
Keyword(s):  
Radioactive Waste ◽  
Waste Management ◽  
Waste Disposal ◽  
Common Ground ◽  
Radioactive Waste Disposal ◽  
National Programmes ◽  
Geological Repository ◽  
Safety Case ◽  
Definition Of

Abstract. Most, if not all, national programmes for radioactive waste management pledge their overall commitment to safety or – in the case of radioactive waste disposal – to long-term safety. Therefore, it may be somewhat surprising to find that the term “safety” is hardly defined in these programs. The same holds for some of the core international guidance literature on the deep geological repository (DGR) “safety case” concept. With respect to stakeholder concern over the safety of geological disposal, it seems, however, advisable to seek common ground in the understanding of the idea of “safety”. Hotzel and Schröder (2018) reviewed the most relevant international guidance literature for explicitly or implicitly provided definitions of “safety” in the context of radioactive waste disposal. Based on this study – and on the finding that a practical, useful-for-all definition of “safety” is not provided in the scanned literature – they developed a tentative dictionary-style definition of “safety” that is suitable for everyday use in the DGR context. In the current contribution I embed, expand and update the 2018 study at both ends: As an enhanced introduction to the 2018 study, I lay out a basic concept of “sound” glossary definitions, namely glossary definitions being both practical and correct (and what this means). The thesis is that sound glossary definitions can facilitate mutual understanding between different stakeholder groups. As an update to the actual proposal for the definition of “safety” from the Hotzel and Schröder (2018) paper, that was presented and discussed at the Waste Management Conference 2018, I review the latest international guidance literature and the stakeholder concerns raised at the 2018 conference in order to present a revised definition. As a seed of discussion, it may help to eventually expose possible mismatches in the base assumptions of safety experts and other stakeholders and thereby support meaningful communication.

scholarly journals Collectors on illicit collecting: Higher loyalties and other techniques of neutralization in the unlawful collecting of rare and precious orchids and antiquities

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Simon Mackenzie ◽  
D Yates
Keyword(s):  
Common Ground ◽  
Regulatory Policy ◽  
Narrative Discourse ◽  
The Other ◽  
Considerable Degree ◽  
Wildlife Crime ◽  
Techniques Of Neutralization ◽  
Cultural Objects ◽  
Wildlife Trafficking ◽  
Definition Of

© 2015, © The Author(s) 2015. Trafficking natural objects and trafficking cultural objects have been treated separately both in regulatory policy and in criminological discussion. The former is generally taken to be ‘wildlife crime’ while the latter has come to be considered under the auspices of a debate on ‘illicit art and antiquities’. In this article we study the narrative discourse of high-end collectors of orchids and antiquities. The illicit parts of these global trades are subject to this analytical divide between wildlife trafficking and art trafficking, and this has resulted in quite different regulatory structures for each of these markets. However, the trafficking routines, the types and levels of harm involved, and the supply–demand dynamics in the trafficking of orchids and antiquities are actually quite similar, and in this study we find those structural similarities reflected in substantial common ground in the way collectors talk about their role in each market. Collectors of rare and precious orchids and antiquities valorize their participation in markets that are known to be in quite considerable degree illicit, appealing to ‘higher loyalties’ such as preservation, appreciation of aesthetic beauty and cultural edification. These higher loyalties, along with other techniques of neutralization, deplete the force of law as a guide to appropriate action. We propose that the appeal to higher loyalties is difficult to categorize as a technique of neutralization in this study as it appears to be a motivational explanation for the collectors involved. The other classic techniques of neutralization are deflective, guilt and critique reducing narrative mechanisms, while higher loyalties drives illicit behaviour in collecting markets for orchids and antiquities in ways that go significantly beyond the normal definition of neutralization.

scholarly journals A Second Wave? What Do People Mean By COVID Waves? – A Working Definition of Epidemic Waves

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stephen X. Zhang ◽  
Francisco Arroyo Marioli ◽  
Renfei Gao
Keyword(s):  
Common Ground ◽  
Reproduction Number ◽  
Resource Planning ◽  
Healthcare Organizations ◽  
The Public ◽  
Working Definition ◽  
Public Data ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Second Wave ◽  
Epidemic Wave

AbstractPolicymakers and researchers describe the COVID-19 epidemics by waves without a common vocabulary on what constitutes an epidemic wave, either in terms of a working definition or operationalization, causing inconsistencies and confusions. A working definition and operationalization can be helpful to characterize and communicate about epidemics. We propose a working definition of epidemic waves in the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic and an operationalization based on the public data of the effective reproduction number R. Our operationalization characterizes the numbers and durations of waves (upward and downward) in 178 countries and reveals patterns that can enable healthcare organizations and policymakers to make better description and assessment of the COVID crisis to make more informed resource planning, mobilization, and allocation temporally in the continued COVID-19 pandemic.One Sentence SummaryA working definition and operationalization of waves to enable common ground to understand and communicate COVID-19 crisis.

Common Ground

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andreas Stokke
Keyword(s):  
Common Ground ◽  
Detailed Account ◽  
The Common ◽  
Definition Of

This chapter provides a detailed account of the notion of the common ground of conversations, which plays a central role in the Stalnakerian account of assertion that the book relies on for its characterization of lying. The chapter specifies that common ground information is defined in terms of acceptance, rather than belief, and shows how this feature allows that bald-faced lies are assertions. Moreover, the chapter demonstrates how the Stalnakerian conception of communication makes room for bald-faced implicatures. A number of objections to this picture of assertion and the common ground definition of lying are rebutted, including issues concerning the notion of proposing information for common ground uptake, as well as problems involving metaphor and malapropism.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document