scholarly journals REDUPLICATION PROCESSES IN TURKISH AND GERMAN: A CONTRASTIVE STUDY

2021 ◽  
pp. 204-221
Author(s):  
Buse ŞEN ERDOĞAN
Keyword(s):  
Common Ground ◽  
The Other ◽  
Second Step ◽  
New Words ◽  
Contrastive Study ◽  
Other Hand ◽  
Idiomatic Expressions ◽  
The Common

The main goal of this study is to analyse the reduplicative structures in two languages: Turkish and German. Unlike German, Turkish is known as a language that actively uses productive reduplicative structures. There are different functions of these structures. They can be employed to produce new words in some languages or they can add different meanings to the existing words. They are mostly divided as partial and full reduplication. Also, some of the reduplication processes are productive, which means they can be used with new words unlike unproductive reduplication which can only be used with some specific words in that language. This study is a contrastive study and this requires three steps in the study: description, juxtaposition and comparison (Krzeszowski, 1990: 35). In the description step, the features of reduplication are defined and reduplicative processes in Turkish and German are described. In the second step, juxtaposition, the common ground to be compared in two languages are stated. At the end in the comparison step, the differences and similarities regarding reduplicative processes in two languages are determined related to type and degree. In terms of degree, both languages have full and partial reduplication. On the other hand, German has more types of reduplicative structures compared to Turkish. When two languages are compared regarding type, it is possible to state that German reduplicative structures are mostly unproductive, which means those structures are generally lexicalized or idiomatic expressions and do not allow for new words unlike Turkish.

On gestural mimicry

Gesture ◽  
2006 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 39-61 ◽  
Author(s):  
Irene Kimbara
Keyword(s):  
Detailed Analysis ◽  
Speech Production ◽  
Single Unit ◽  
Common Ground ◽  
The Other ◽  
Other Hand ◽  
The Common ◽  
Relationship Of ◽  
Exact Origin ◽  
Internal Coupling

Despite various theories about the exact origin of gestures in speech production, researchers generally accept that gesture and speech constitute the product of a single unit of thought within the speaker. On the other hand, what I call gestural mimicry requires consideration of factors outside such speaker-internal coupling of gesture and speech. Through detailed analysis of a joint narration task and casual conversation in a dyad, I will show that, once perceived and decoded by a partner, the form–meaning relationship of a speaker’s gesture can become part of the common ground of understanding between the participants. In gestural mimicry, communicativity is observed in the way a speaker’s spontaneous gesture shapes the subsequent gestural move of the interlocutor. With a recurrence of gestural features across speakers, image construal through gesture becomes an interactional phenomenon. That is, gesture as well as speech provides an interactional resource for co-constructing talk.

scholarly journals Three Takes on De-Colonizing the State Apparatus in Bolivia

2020 ◽  
Vol 25 ◽  
pp. 60-64
Author(s):  
Chuck Sturtevant
Keyword(s):  
Common Ground ◽  
Indigenous Communities ◽  
The State ◽  
The Other ◽  
Other Hand ◽  
State Apparatus ◽  
The Common ◽  
The Government

This response summarizes and compares three scholars’ approaches (Marcelo Bohrt, Robert Albro and Pamela Calla) to the Morales administration’s efforts to decolonize the government of Bolivia. Seeking   the common ground among them, I find that all three recognize the importance of symbolic and discursive changes, which have allowed  some previously-excluded individuals to access positions of authority within the state apparatus. On the other hand, these changes have been uneven, exposing rifts between indigenous communities, exacerbating existing inequities, and establishing new or renewed hierarchies of subordination.   

The Rubicon of Language

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sebastian Lecourt
Keyword(s):  
The Other ◽  
Racial Identities ◽  
Other Hand ◽  
Max Müller ◽  
The Common ◽  
Human Capacity ◽  
The One ◽  
Religious Differences

This chapter considers a series of formative debates in British anthropology from the 1840s through the 1860s and uses them to map out the two dominant constructions of religion whose politics the subsequent authors in this study would reinvent. It describes, on the one hand, a liberal and evangelical construction of religion as the common human capacity for spiritual cultivation, and on the other hand a conservative, reactionary model that interpreted religious differences as the expressions of fixed racial identities that neither civilization nor Christianization could erase. In the work of the Oxford philologist F. Max Müller we see how the former model tended to associate religion above all with language. But we can also see the subtle forms of determinism that it contained—an ambiguity that Arnold, Pater, Eliot, and Lang would explore by picturing racialized religion as a resource for liberal self-cultivation.

Common Lawà l'americaine

1966 ◽  
Vol 1 (4) ◽  
pp. 562-579 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. M. Apelbom
Keyword(s):  
Common Law ◽  
The Other ◽  
British Occupation ◽  
Other Hand ◽  
Two Generations ◽  
The Common ◽  
English Law ◽  
Considerable Body ◽  
Clear Line

Eighteen years after attaining independence Israel remains essentially a common law country. Introduced by the British Mandatory administration to supplement the Ottoman legislation in force at the time of the British occupation of Palestine, the common law has been retained by the Israeli legislator, so far as not modified or replaced by local legislation. But this common law, far from being residual only, also embraces a considerable body of interstitial law developed by two generations of judges, British, Palestinian and Israeli, in the process of applying and interpreting statute law—whether Ottoman, Mandatory or Israeli—according to common law methods. On the other hand the importation of common law institutions was neither wholesale nor systematic and in a number of fields no clear line of demarcation can be drawn between domestic and English law.

Fielding and Richardson

PMLA ◽  
1966 ◽  
Vol 81 (5) ◽  
pp. 381-388
Author(s):  
William Park
Keyword(s):  
Twentieth Century ◽  
Eighteenth Century ◽  
Human Nature ◽  
General Type ◽  
Common Ground ◽  
The Other ◽  
The Novel ◽  
Tom Jones ◽  
The Common ◽  
The One

But the Discovery [of when to laugh and when to cry] was reserved for this Age, and there are two Authors now living in this Metropolis, who have found out the Art, and both brother Biographers, the one of Tom Jones, and the other of Clarissa.author of Charlotte SummersRather than discuss the differences which separate Fielding and Richardson, I propose to survey the common ground which they share with each other and with other novelists of the 1740's and 50's. In other words I am suggesting that these two masters, their contemporaries, and followers have made use of the same materials and that as a result the English novels of the mid-eighteenth century may be regarded as a distinct historic version of a general type of literature. Most readers, it seems to me, do not make this distinction. They either think that the novel is always the same, or they believe that one particular group of novels, such as those written in the early twentieth century, is the form itself. In my opinion, however, we should think of the novel as we do of the drama. No one kind of drama, such as Elizabethan comedy or Restoration comedy, is the drama itself; instead, each is a particular manifestation of the general type. Each kind bears some relationship to the others, but at the same time each has its own identity, which we usually call its conventions. By conventions I mean not only stock characters, situations, and themes, but also notions and assumptions about the novel, human nature, society, and the cosmos itself. If we compare one kind of novel to another without first considering the conventions of each, we are likely to make the same mistake that Thomas Rymer did when he blamed Shakespeare for not conforming to the canons of classical French drama.

scholarly journals The Impact of Human Capital on Stocks Performance in Emerging Markets: Evidence From Egypt

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 73
Author(s):  
Walid Abouzeid ◽  
Sharihan Mohamed Aly
Keyword(s):  
Human Capital ◽  
Emerging Markets ◽  
Banking Sector ◽  
The Other ◽  
Common Stock ◽  
General Tendency ◽  
Other Hand ◽  
The Common ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Statistical Results

This study attempts to investigate the impact of human capital on the common stock's return. The population of the study is Egyptian companies listed at the Egyptian exchange (EGX) due to 2014-2018. The statistical results indicate that there is a general tendency to change common stock's hold return to the corporation's human capital, and it is significant at 0.01 levels. In other terms, it can be stated that the corporation's human capital has a significant impact on common stock's hold return in the Egyptian corporation, and according to Adjusted R-squared the corporation's human capital explain a 57.8% from the change common stock's hold return.so; led to the impact of human capital on creating value of common stock. This can be traced back to investing in "the development and researches" on the other hand besides training, therefore medicine and technology companies get affected through these fields of development researches areas; however companies in industrial and banking sector get impacted by training field.

scholarly journals Rethinking Hijab in Contemporary Indonesia: A Study of Hijab Community “Tuneeca Lover Community”

2019 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 214-221
Author(s):  
Wardah Nuroniyah
Keyword(s):  
Social Class ◽  
Qualitative Method ◽  
Public Domain ◽  
The Other ◽  
The Public ◽  
Other Hand ◽  
The Common ◽  
The Veil ◽  
The One ◽  
Common Perception

Hijab (veil) for female Muslims has been subject to a debate regarding its meanings. On the one hand, it represents the virtue of religious obedience and piety. Still, on the other hand, it is associated with the form of women oppressions in the public domain. At this point, the hijab has been an arena of contesting interpretations. Meanwhile, contemporary Indonesia is witnessing the increase in the use of veil among urban female Muslims that leads to the birth of various hijab wearer communities. One of them is Tuneeca Lover Community (TLC). This community has become a new sphere where female Muslims articulate their ideas about Islam through various activities such as religious gathering, hijab tutorial class, fashion show, and charity activities. This study seeks to answer several questions: Why do these women decide to wear a hijab? Why do they join the TLC? How do they perceive the veil? Is it related to religious doctrines or other factors such as lifestyle? This research employs a qualitative method using documentation and interview to gather the data among 150 members of the TLC.  This research shows that their understanding of the hijab results from the common perception that places the veil as a religious obligation. Nevertheless, each of the members has one's orientation over the hijab. This paper also suggests that they try to transform this understanding into modern settings. As a consequence, they are not only committed to the traditionally spiritual meaning of the hijab but are also nuanced with modern ideas such as lifestyle and particular social class. Their participation in the TLC enables them to reach both goals simultaneously.

Ruskin's Reputation in the Eighteen-Fifties : The Evidence of the Three Principal Weeklies

PMLA ◽  
1948 ◽  
Vol 63 (2) ◽  
pp. 678-685 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. D. Jump
Keyword(s):  
The Other ◽  
Common Belief ◽  
William Morris ◽  
Other Hand ◽  
The Common ◽  
Pre Raphaelites ◽  
The Times ◽  
Eighteen Fifties

Mr. R. H. Wilenski protests against the common belief that Ruskin was a kind of Art-Dictator of England in the eighteen-fifties. Ruskin, he says, was not a best-selling author during that decade; nor, on the other hand, was he respected by established artists and architects. So slight was his repute, indeed, that his letters to the Times in May 1851 can have done little to influence either the general or the specialist public in favor of pre-Raphaelitism. This drastic revision of accepted notions has had surprisingly little effect. In Mr. Paul Bloomfield's William Morris, Ruskin appears once more as the critic who gave “status” to the Pre-Raphaelites; and Mr. William Gaunt declares that on May 13, 1851, “an eagle scream was heard, a mighty talon hovered over the correspondence columns of The Times. It was Ruskin to the rescue. The Pre-Raphaelites had found a champion.” Neither of these writers mentions Wilenski's dissent.

«Liberdades e Direitos» No Horizonte da Soberania

2000 ◽  
Vol 8 (15) ◽  
pp. 151-175
Author(s):  
Viriato Soromenho-Marques ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Civil War ◽  
French Revolution ◽  
Common Ground ◽  
The Other ◽  
English Civil War ◽  
Reciprocal Influence ◽  
Political Tradition ◽  
Long Period ◽  
The Common ◽  
Relationship Of

The common ground and dissimilarities in the reciprocal influence between two apparently identical concepts in the Contemporary western political tradition - freedom and liberty - are dealt in this paper. The author tries to tackle the interrelated genealogy both of freedom and liberty categories, in the long period opened by the English Civil War and closed by the conflicting reactions to the French Revolution. The sovereignty concept on the other hand allows the reader to understand the ongoing dynamic of the crucial philosophical relationship of these two central concepts.

Entrepreneurship vs. Bioentrepreneurship

2021 ◽  
pp. 39-58
Author(s):  
Sneha Upreti
Keyword(s):  
The Other ◽  
Future Perspective ◽  
Developed Country ◽  
Other Hand ◽  
Start Up ◽  
Great Idea ◽  
New Business ◽  
Innovative Idea ◽  
The Common ◽  
The Difference

The word bioentrepreneurship and entrepreneurship share the similarity in the fact that they must have a great and an innovative idea behind starting a business setup and to raise an investment. Also, they both must have a great idea about marketing of the related products and managing their start-up. If we talk about the difference, the common difference is the sector or field in which a startup is carrying on. In simple words, entrepreneurship is the process of launching any new business based on an innovative idea. On the other hand, bioentrepreneurship is the process that is started in the field of science (i.e., biotechnology). Nowadays, bio-industrialization is the key to being a modern and developed country, and this is the only reason bioentrepreneurs are highly in demand. Thus, this chapter will help you to understand the pillars to setup a startup based on biotechnology that has an excellent future perspective not only for entrepreneurs but also for the nation.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document