Добірка наукової літератури з теми "Hobyot (langue)"

Indian English is one of the most important and widely-spoken varieties of English, and yet at present the pinnacle of lexicographical treatment of the variety remains the well-renowned and much feted Hobson Jobson, originally published in 1886, with a second edition in 1903. British English has the Oxford, American English the Webster’s, Australian English the Macquarie, but Indian English must do with a dictionary over a century out of date. More recent lexicographical works that focus on Indian English suffer from a number of deficiencies that do not do the variety due justice. This paper analyses a selection of the currently available dictionaries on Indian English in order to identify these deficiencies. Finally, suggestions are made as to possible dictionary projects that may move Indian English lexicography, and the lexicography of other New Englishes, beyond Hobson Jobson and towards the 21st century.

AbstractFictional names pose a difficult puzzle for semantics. How can we maintain that Frodo is a hobbit, while admitting that Frodo does not exist? To dissolve this paradox, I propose a way to formalize the interpretation of fiction as ‘prescriptions to imagine’ (

Artikulu honetan Zeanuriko euskararen intonazio eredu nagusien azterketa aurkezten dugu. Azterketa fonetikoarekin batera, datuen azalpenerako, azterketa fonologikoa ere dakargu. Zeanuriko intonazio ereduek interes handia daukate, izan ere, hobeto ezagutzen ditugun Bizkaiko itsasaldeko ereduen aldean, Zeanuriko eredua, Bizkaiko hegoaldean kokaturik, nahikoa desberdina da. Datuak jasotzeko erabili dugun metodologia eta bertako azentu ereduaren ezaugarri nagusiak azaldu eta ostean, esaldi deklaratzaile eta galderazkoen azterketa egiten dugu.

Artikulu honetan, eskolan euskaraz erabiltzen diren azalpenezko testu idatziaetan agertzen diren elementu anaforikoak aztertzen ditu egileak. Baliabide horiek hobeto ezagutzeko helburuarekin bi testu multzo aztertu dira: Natur Zientzietako hiru testuliburuetako unitate didaktiko batean erabilitako azalpenak, eta ikasleek eskolan ekoiztutako azalpenak. Testu horietan gaia mantentzeko edo berrartzeko erabiltzen diren adierazpenak aztertu ondoren, multzo bakoitzean ikusitako ezaugarri nagusienak eta bien artean dauden zenbait ezberdintasuni buruzko hausnarketak bildu dira lan honetan.

The present paper argues that the analysis of the functional spectrum of pragmatic markers (PMs) serves as a heuristic tool for studying the interactional dynamics of dialogues in a variety of genres and discourse types, whether naturally-occurring, scripted or literary. By way of arguing my point I will discuss the results of three of my previous case studies aimed at exploring the role of PMs. The case studies, by virtue of the types of discourse they are based on (mediatised political interviews, dramatised/televised conversations and literary texts) reveal different patterns of dialogicity, and complement the analyses of spontaneous everyday conversations, the type of data most of the current PM research draws on. In the course of my analyses I also hope to illustrate that the cross-fertilization between dialogue analysis, PM research and literary pragmatics has a lot to offer to all three disciplines.

Статтю присвячено вивченню впливу чинника статі мовного посередника на застосовувані ним пріоритетні стратегії під час створення цільового тексту. Емпіричним матеріалом дослідження слугували тексти англомовної художньої прози та їхні українські переклади у виконанні чоловіків та жінок. Застосований у праці психолінгвістичний підхід до аналізу двомовного корпусу дав змогу встановити деякі ‘S-універсалії’ (Chesterman, 2011) вибору різностатевими посередниками тих чи тих мовних структур, що дає підстави погодитися з іншими дослідниками в питанні існування значущих відмінностей у гендерних пріоритетах структурування перекладного дискурсу. Серед найпомітніших “жіночих” універсалій в перекладі українською – метакогнітивна гнучкість, що кваліфікуємо як синтетичний когнітивний стиль. Крім того, простежено застосування перекладачками стратегії статусної нейтралізації в діалозі між персонажами під час відтворення статусно-маркованих і дифузних ситуацій; вищі показники лексичного розмаїття, експліцитації й номіналізації, ніж у цільових версіях перекладачів чоловічої статі. Останні виявляють більшу обережність у перекладі, вдаючись до ‘семантичного методу’ (Newmark, 1988) перекладу, виявляючи відтак аналітичний когнітивний стиль поведінки, а також демонструючи стратегію негативної ввічливості під час відтворення діалогів персонажів у статусно-маркованих і статусно-дифузних комунікативних ситуаціях. Література References Бендас Т. В. Гендерная психология. – СПб.: Питер, 2007.Bendas, T. (2007). Gendernaya Psikhologiya [Gender Psychology]. St. Petersburg: Piter. Карасик В. И. Социальный статус человека в лингвистическом аспекте // “Я”, “Субъект”,“Индивид” в парадигмах современного языкознания. – М. : ИЯ РАН, 1992. – С. 47–74.Karasik, V. I. (1992). Sotsialnyi status cheloveka v lingvisticheskom aspekte [Human socialstatus in linguistic aspect] ‘Ya’, ‘Subjekt’, ‘Individ’ v Paradigmakh SovremennogoYazykoznania, 47–74. Кутузов А. Переводы мужские и женские: есть ли разница? (на материале Корпусанесовершенных переводов)/А. Кутузов // Проблемы перевода, лингвистики илитературы. – 2012. – Вып. 15, № 1. – С. 97-104.Kutuzov, A. (2012). Perevody muzhskiye i zhenskiye: yest li raznitsa? [Male and femaletranslations: Any difference?]. Problemy Perevoda, Lingvistiki i Literatury, 15(1), 97-104. Сорокин Ю. А. Переводоведение: статус переводчика и психогерменевтическиепроцедуры. – М. : МТДК «Гнозис», 2003. – 160 с.Sorokin, Yu. A. (2003). Perevodovedeniye: Status Perevodchika i PsikhogermenevticheskiyeProcedury [Translation Studies: Translator’s Status and Psychohermeneutic Procedures].Moscow: Gnozis.5. Холод А. М. Речевые картины мира мужчин и женщин. – Днепропетровск : Пороги, 1997.– 229 с. Kholod, A. M. (1997). Rechevye kartiny mira muzhchin i zhenshchyn [Speech world view ofmen and women]. Dnepropetrovsk: Porogi. Холодная М. А. Когнитивные стили: О природе индивидуального ума. – М. : ПЕР СЭ,2002. – 304 с.Kholodnaya М. А. (2002). Kognitivnye Stili: O Prirode Individualnogo Uma [Cognitive Styles:On the Nature of Individual Mind]. Мoscow: PERSE. Arabski, J. (2013). Psycholinguistic and neurobiological differences between males andfemales. Proceedings of the 10th International Congress of the ISAPL (423). Baker, M. (1999). The role of corpora in investigating the linguistic behaviour of translators.International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 4(2), 281–298. Berman, A. (1990). La retraduction comme espace de traduction. Palimpsestes, 4, 1–7. Blum-Kulka, S. (1986). Shifts of cohesion and coherence in translation. In: Interlingual andIntercultural Communication (pp. 17–35). J. House, S. Blum-Kulka, (Eds). Tübingen: Narr. Brown, P., Levinson, S. (1987). Politeness: Some Universals in Language Usage. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press. Chesterman, A. (2000). A causal model for Translation Studies. In: Intercultural Faultlines:Research Models in Translation Studies I: Textual and Cognitive Aspects (pp. 15–27).M. Olohan, (Ed). Manchester: St. Jerome. Denturck, K. (2012). Explicitation vs. implicitation: a bidirectional corpus-based analysis ofcausal connectives in french and dutch translations. Across Languages and Cultures, 13(2),211–227. Desmidt, I. (2009). (Re)translation revisited. Meta: Translators’ Journal, 54(4), 669–683. Leonardi, V. (2007). Gender and Ideology in Translation. Do Women and Men TranslateDifferently? A Contrastive Analysis from Italian into English. Bern: Peter Lang AG. Laviosa, S. (2002). Corpus-based Translation Studies. Theory, Finding, Applications.Amsterdam; Atlanta: Rodopi. Newmark, P. (1988). Approaches to Translation. London: Prentice Hall. Olohan, M. (2002). Leave it out! Using a comparable corpus to investigate aspects ofexplicitation in translation. Cadernos de Tradução, 9, 153–169. Vinay, J. & Darbelnet, J. (1995). Comparative Stylistics of French and English. Translated byJ. C. Sager and M. J. Hamel. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Zasiekin, S. (2016). Understanding translation universals. Babel: International Journal ofTranslation, 62(1), 122–134. Sources Bradbury, R. The Smile. Retrieved from: http://raybradbury.ru/library/ story/52/9/1/ Bradbury, R. (1983). Fahrenheit. Short Stories. Moscow: Raduga Publishers, 1983. – 382 p. Бредбері Р. Усмішка / пер. з англ. Л. Коломієць // Всесвітня література в середніхнавчальних закладах України. К.: Педагогічна преса, 1999. № 3 (227). С. 11–12.Bradbury, R. (1999). Ousmishka [The Smile] / translated by L. Kolomiyets. VsesvitniaLiteratura v Serednikh Navchalnykh Zakladakh Ukrainy, 3(227), 11–12. Бредбері Р. Усмішка / пер. з англ. А. Веприняка // Зарубіжна література. 6 клас.Посібник-хрестоматія. Тернопіль: Навчальна книга – Богдан, 1999а. С. 296–300.Bradbury, R. (1999). Ousmishka [The Smile] / translated by Yaroslav Vepryniak. ZarubizhnaLiteratura. 6th Form, 296–300. Бредбері Р. Усмішка / пер. з англ. А. Євси // Світова література. 6 клас. Хрестоматія /Упорядник Гарбуз В. М. ; наук. ред. Таранік-Ткачук К. В. – Харків : ФОП Співак В. Л.,2011. – С. 374–381.Bradbury, R. (2011). Ousmishka [The Smile] / translated by Andrii Ievsa. Svitova Literatura.6th Form. Textbook, 374–381. Браун Д. Код да Вінчі. – Х.: Клуб сімейного дозвілля, 2006.Brown, D. (2006). Kod da Vinchi [The Da Vinci Code] / translated by A. Kamianets’.Kharkiv: Club Simeinoho Dozvillia. Браун Д. Код да Вінчі. // Всесвіт. – 2006. – № 1–4, 11–12. – К. : Всесвіт.Brown, D. (2006). Kod da Vinchi [The Da Vinci Code] / translated by V. Shovkun. Vsesvit,1–4, 11–12. КТУМ: Корпус текстів української мови / [Електронний ресурс]. Режим доступу:http://www.mova.info/corpus.aspx?l1=209Korpus Tekstiv Ukrains’koyi Movy [The Corpus of the Ukrainian Language] / [ElectronicResource]. Retrieved from: http://www.mova.info/corpus.aspx?l1=209 Slovnyk Ukrainskoyi Movy [Dictionary of the Ukrainian Language] / I. K. Bilodid, ed. –Vol. 5. Kyiv: Naukova Dumka. – P. 36, 100. Tolkien J. R. R. (1954). The Fellowship of the Ring. L.: George Allen & Unwin. Толкін Дж. Р. Р. Володар Перснів: Хранителі Персня / пер. з англ. А. Немірової. Харків:Фоліо, 2003. Толкін Дж. Р. Р. Старий ліс: Уривок з епопеї «Володар Перснів» / пер. з англ.А. Веселовського // Всесвіт. 2006. №№ 11–12, 124–135. Tolkien, J. R. R. (1981). The Hobbit, or, There and Back Again. L. : Unwin. Толкін Дж. Р. Р. Гобіт, або Туди і Звідти / пер. з англ. О. О’Лір. – Львів: Астролябія,2012.Tolkien, J. R. R. (2012). Hobit abo Tudy i Zvidty [The Hobbit, or There and Back] / translated byОlena О’Lear. Lviv: Astroliabia. Толкін Дж. Р. Р. Гобіт, або Мандрівка за Імлисті гори / пер. з англ. О. Мокровольського.– К. : Веселка, 1985.Tolkien, J. R. R. (1985). Hobit abo Mandrivka za Imlysti Hory [The Hobbit, or a Trip Beyond theMisty Mountains] / translated by Оlexandr Mokrovols’kyi. Кyiv: Veselka.6. Brown, D. (2003). The Da Vinci Code. L. : Corgi Books.

Frantzisko Arrate Mandiola eibartar apaizaren sermoietarik hiru, 1861-1869 urteen bitartean idatziak, gaitzat hartzen dira. Eibarren egiten den bizkaierazko euskalkian daude. Aginaga auzoko San Migel Arkanjeluaren parrokiako artxibategian aurkituak dira. Orain Euskaltzaindiko artxibategian daude. Testuan ematen diren lehen argitasunak hiriaren Iparraldera Artibai hegalean aurkitzen den auzo horren kokapenari buruzkoak dira, ondotik sermoiei buruz ihardutzeko. Eibarren ahoskeraz oraindik erabiltzen den euskalki erarekin bat datoz. Predikuaren gaiak honako hauek dira: Luxuria edo haragikeria, Joangoia gaiztuak kaztigu eternuetara eta Miserikordiaz. Guzion argibiderako oharrez azalduaz, zeren egileak gaztelerazko ortografiaz idatzi zituenez transkribatze zuzenean egiten da, baina oharrok Euskaltzaindiaren gomendiozko grafian jarriaz, hobeto irakurri ahal izateko eta aldi berean euskal filologiarako zerbitzeko eran.

This article examines the practice of dual translation (heyi) in the late Qing, focusing in particular on Quanti xinlun, a physiological treatise compiled by Benjamin Hobson (1816-1873) and his Chinese assistants. It argues that, owing to the considerable latitude allowed to Hobson’s Chinese partners, the intellectual syncretism of the translation was a direct consequence of the Chinese agency at play in intercultural exchange. The collaborative process in the making of Quanti xinlun is also explored, and two passages in which the “Sinicization” of western physiology is most obvious are analyzed. Cet article s’intéresse à la pratique de la double traduction (heyi). Il examine plus ­particulièrement sur le Quanti xinlun, un traité de physiologie compilé par Benjamen Hobson (1816-1873) et ses assistants chinois. L’argument est qu’en raison du degré considérable d’autonomie laissé à ces derniers, le syncrétisme intellectuel qui caractérise la traduction découle directement de l’intervention chinoise dans le processus d’échange interculturel. L’article examine également la façon dont fonctionnait le travail de collaboration dont est issu le Quanti xinlun et propose une analyse de deux passages dans lesquels la “sinisation” de la physiologie occidentale est particulièrement en évidence.

Le hobyot, langue sémitique parlée par un nombre très restreint de locuteurs dans l’est du Yémen et dans le sud du Sultanat d’Oman, est classé par l’Unesco comme langue « sérieusement en danger ». Menacé d’extinction à court terme, le hobyot a, hélas, été très peu décrit jusqu’à présent. On manque d’une description linguistique complète et de documents sonores. C’est l’objet de ce travail que de fournir une telle description
Hobyot is a Semitic language with a very limited number of speakers in the east of Yemen and the south of the Sultanate of Oman and classified by UNESCO as a "seriously endangered" language. Despite some previous studies, no full linguistic description, including sound files exists - as of yet. It is the goal of this study to close this gap and offer a comprehensive account of Hobyot

We now know that the ‘birth of the discipline’ of international relations in the United States is a story about empire. The foundations of early international relations theory are set in not just international law and historical sociology but evolutionary biology and racial anthropology. The problem is the way in which scholars today deal with the place of race in the thought of John Hobson, Paul Reinsch, and virtually all other social scientists of the era. The strand of thought that still resonates in our own time about empire, states, and the like is raised up and depicted as the scientific or theoretical core in the scholars’ work, while the strand that involves now archaic racial constructs is downgraded and treated instead as mere ‘language’, ‘metaphors’, and ‘prejudices’ of the era. To undo this error and recover in full the ideas of early international relations theorists it is necessary to bring the work of historians of conservative and reform Darwinism to bear on the first specialists and foundational texts in international relations.

The Burlington Magazine for Connoisseurs was founded in 1903 by a group of art theorists, scholars and historians that included Roger Fry, later a co-editor of the magazine for almost ten years (1909-1919). On Fry’s death in 1934, the magazine itself described him as ‘the man who in the past did most to establish it and mould its character’. Part of this character was a consistent attention to Chinese art that he shared with fellow Bloomsbury writers, artists and intellectuals. This chapter illuminates Fry’s practice as a theorist and an editor interested in the arts of China by examining how these were represented and discussed in the Burlington Magazine under his auspices. It focuses especially on the kinds of language, discourse and textual strategies of sinophile contributors such as Arthur Waley, Lawrence Binyon, Perceval Yetts and R.L. Hobson. The chapter locates their approaches to Chinese art within a longer-term Western historiography of China and its culture(s), as well as within late-nineteenth and early-twentieth century discourses such as aestheticism, scientism and orientalism. It thus attempts to unpack the ideological implications of the ‘connoisseurship’ professed by the magazine’s title as applied to the subject of Chinese art.

In its original form this chapter was delivered at a late-1970s forum sponsored by the Commission on the Status of Women in the Profession of the Modern Language Association. It had a kind of underground, mimeographed existence for a few years before seeing print in Feminist Studies in 1983. It has made its way and continues, I think, to be useful for those studying the canon. I have therefore not undertaken to change it. Judith Fetterley has raised one important criticism of the piece. In her fine introduction to Provisions: A Reader From 19th-century American Women (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1985, pp. 18–19) she argues that the exclusion of nineteenth-century women writers from the literary canon began far earlier than the 1920s, in fact during the nineteenth century itself. There is significant evidence to support that contention. John Macy’s 1911 volume The Spirit of American Literature, for example, devotes its sixteen chapters to sixteen white men, though his “Preface” expresses admiration for the work of Jewett, Freeman and Wharton, and even passingly for Stowe. Brander Matthews’ similar volume, An Introduction to the Study of American Literature (1896, rev. 1911), focuses fifteen chapters on individual white men and then devotes one to “other writers,” including Whitman and Stowe. These very likely reflected the state of much academic opinion, though volumes like An American Anthology, 1787–1900 (ed., Edmund Clarence Stedman, 1900) and Mildred Cabell Watkins’ young adult primer, American Literature (1894) offer countervailing evidence. And, of course, as I outline in the article, other older academics like Fred Lewis Pattee and Arthur Hobson Quinn offered a far wider version of American letters. Fetterley thus provides what I think is a useful corrective to broad generalizations about academic canons, especially with respect to early and mid-nineteenth-century writers. But the central point, in my view, is that dominantly male academic accounts of the American canon were far less weighty around the turn of the century than they became in and after the 1920s.

Abstract In this chapter, children’s affective development in childhood is considered within the framework of their close relationships. The striking developments in children’s emotional expression and experience and in their understanding of emotions during early childhood take place in the context of these relationships and profoundly affect the nature of such relationships. In turn, children’s experiences within their close relationships are related to both normative and individual differences in affective development. Three core themes in current developmental research are particularly important for our understanding of affective development and its links with children’s social relationships. First, there has been major growth over the past decade in research on children’s understanding of emotions—clearly of key significance for the nature of relationships. Second, a key theme in research on affective development in infancy and early childhood has been the significance of reciprocal emotional communication between child and caregiver and the growth of “intersubjectivity” (Braten, 1998). These developments are seen as setting the stage for relationship development in the childhood years that follow. Third, the work on links between affective development and social relationships has provided an exciting opportunity to bridge the gap between cognitive and social approaches to understanding children’s development and to address major questions in psychology concerning links between affect and cognition (Dunn, 1996). In infancy and childhood, changes in what causes babies’ distress, comfort, amusement, and interest are intimately linked to the changes in their relationships with others. In parallel, parents’ and siblings’ emotional behavior with young children are intricately connected with the babies’ increasingly differentiated response to their partners’ affective communication. In terms of theoretical approaches, there has been growing interest in functional accounts of the significance of emotional development (Campos, Mumme, Kermoian, & Campos, 1994), in the development of ideas on affective communication, and in how such emotional communication sets a framework for the development of “shared meaning.” Emotion, as Stern (1985) put it, is the primary medium and the primary subject of communication in infancy. The emotional communication between child and partner in the first two years is thought by many scholars to set up a framework for the growth of joint attention and shared reference, for the development of intentional action and the understanding of agency, and thus for the growth of language and the development of a sense of self (see, e.g., Hobson, 1993; Thompson, 1998). In terms of empirical research, advances have been made in documenting babies’ and young children’s sensitivity to their mothers’ and fathers’ emotional expressions, in the detailed analysis of how affective messages are carried by the voice and face and how they change with children’s development, and in toddlers’ and preschoolers’ rapidly growing understanding of emotion and its role in relation to human action.

In this podcast we talk to Dr. Hannah Hobson, Lecturer in Psychology and Researcher at York University, and heads up the Emerald Lab (Emotional and Mental Health Research in Autism and Language Disorders).