7627 research outputs found
Sort by
比較文學框架下，東西方女同志自傳式小說中女性書寫之平行研究──談《鱷魚手記》與《柳橙不是唯一的水果》
No full text此研究聚焦邱妙津的《鱷魚手記》與珍奈．溫特森的《柳橙不是唯一的水果》，並以女性主義與酷兒理論為分析框架，探討女同志群體的生命經驗及其挑戰異性戀文化規範的方式。文中探討兩個核心問題：其一，作者為何選擇自傳式小說作為「現身」的形式；其二，「現身」對作者及女同志群體的意義。研究方法包括文本細讀及符號學理論的應用。
研究指出，在各自的文化背景影響之下，《鱷魚手記》批判台灣社會中的恐同風氣，並反思媒體獵奇報導的傷害；而《柳橙不是唯一的水果》則解構基督教文化中二元性傳統對女性與同志的壓迫，並展示身份探索的多元可能性。這兩部作品皆通過自傳式小說隱匿作者身份，創造安全的發聲空間，兼具個人療愈與社會運動的意義。文本中隱含的寓言故事則呈現兩位作者對性別、身份、社會規範與文化壓迫所進行的反思，同時賦予文本更多樣化的敘事風格
“分限” : 嚴羽“妙悟”説形上等級的佛學淵源與理論分域
No full text緣於文獻版本流傳的差異和佛教語源考索的欠缺，“分限”一詞在嚴羽《滄浪詩話．詩辨》中歷來爭議頗多。考鏡佛教禪宗與古代詩學語境，所謂“分限”多指範園有大小、境界有高低以及程度有深淺等不同，而嚴羽《詩辨》中“分限”與“悟”的關係也應釐定爲“悟有淺深、有分限”。與此相應，嚴羽的“妙悟”理論可劃分爲由深到淺、由高到低的四個等級六個層次。其中，漢魏爲“不假悟”；“謝靈運至盛唐諸公”爲“透撤之悟”；“大曆以還之詩”“晚唐之詩”“本朝蘇黃以下諸家”雖同爲“一知半解之悟”，但三者依次遞降；“熟參無見”爲“終不悟”。
Due to variations in textual transmission and the lack of thorough investigation into Buddhist etymology, the term “Limits” in Yan Yu’s Canglang Shihua: Shibian has long been a subject of debate. Examining the contexts of Buddhist Chan (Zen) and classical poetics, “boundaries” generally refers to differences in scope, levels of realization, and degrees of profundity. The relationship between “boundaries” and “insight” in Yan Yu’s Shibian should thus be understood as “insight varies in depth, and is conditioned by boundaries.”
Accordingly, Yan Yu’s theory of “Miao Wu” (Wondrous Enlightenment) can be divided into hierarchical levels and gradations, ranging from profound to superficial. The Han and Wei dynasties represent the highest level, characterized by “insight without reliance”. Next, the works of Xie Lingyun and the great poets of the flourishing Tang dynasty embody “thorough insight”. Following this, the poetry of the Dali era onward, late Tang poetry, and the works of Su Shi, Huang Tingjian, and others of the Song dynasty are categorized as “partial insight”, with these three groups descending in level. Finally, those who have studied extensively but remain unenlightened represent the lowest level, known as “ultimate non-insight”
Booktalk at Library : Villages and market towns in Hong Kong
No full textWe are delighted to welcome Dr. Patrick H. HASE to share insights from his recent book, Villages and Market Towns in Hong Kong: Settlement and History. Since arriving in Hong Kong in 1972, Dr. HASE has dedicated himself to researching the local history, with a particular focus on the market towns and villages in the New Territories. Due to the scarcity of written documentation on these communities, much of his research was conducted through oral interviews with village elders during the 1980s and 1990s. In this book talk, Dr. HASE will explore the historical evolution of villages on Lantau Island, shedding light on the intricate social dynamics, traditional practices, and the impact of modernization.
About Dr. Patrick H. HASE/= / \u3eDr. Patrick H. HASE received his PhD in History from the University of Cambridge. He has served as a part-time lecturer and the advisory board chairman of the Department of History at Lingnan University. Additionally, he is an honorary advisor to the governments of Hong Kong, Shenzhen, and Kaiping, and a past president and honorary fellow of the Royal Asiatic Society Hong Kong. His previous monographs include The Six-Day War of 1899: Hong Kong in the Age of Imperialism (2008), Custom, Land and Livelihood in Rural South China: The Traditional Land Law of Hong Kong’s New Territories, 1750–1950 (2013), Forgotten Heroes: San On County and Its Magistrates in the Late Ming and Early Qing (2017), and Settlement, Life, and Politics: Understanding the Traditional New Territories (2020).
Photo Album/= / \u3ehttps://gallery.ln.edu.hk/lib/booktalk-20250415
數繪搵工 : 香港就業市場的大數據系列報告之一
No full text面對中美貿易戰爭時代的經濟格局，深入洞察香港勞動力市場的結構性特徵、最新動態與潛在挑戰，對特區政府制定前瞻性的經濟、產業及社會政策至關重要。本研究旨在通過大數據分析，精準描繪當前香港網上招聘市場的全貌。研究團隊嚴格篩選了十個涵蓋綜合、行業垂直及靈活用工的高流量求職平台，利用網絡爬蟲技術系統性搜集了於2024年12月1日至2025年1月9日期間發佈的147,026條招聘廣告。經數據清洗（剔除重複及無效數據）後，最終納入142,901條有效數據。藉助先進的大型語言模型（Deepseek V3）進行自動化文本挖掘，本研究高效提取並分析了職位屬性、技能要求、薪酬福利等多維度關鍵信息，為揭示市場趨勢奠定了堅實的實證基礎。主要研究發現如下：
一、整體市場格局：傳統主導、需求兩極、透明度堪憂
1. 結構固化，服務業驅動顯著：香港招聘市場需求高度集中於傳統服務業（進出口/批發零售、金融保險、住宿膳食佔逾四成），地域上亦極度聚集於核心商業區。 職位供給以全職（逾八成）、初級崗位（佔四成）為主，輔以相當數量的高級職位（逾兩成），呈現「啞鈴型」職級結構。 工作內容則由管理與服務類（合計逾六成）主導。這反映了香港既有的服務型經濟結構。
2. 用工市場在技能需求上呈現「實用主義」與「兩極分化」。 學歷與經驗要求差異懸殊，既有大量低門檻崗位（近六成無需大專以上學歷），也穩定需求高學歷專才（近三成要求大學或以上）。 硬技能方面，基礎數碼能力（近四成需求）已成常態，特定行業重視專業資格；然而，對尖端技術（如AI/大數據，需求不足2%）的吸納明顯滯後。 軟技能則高度聚焦於團隊協作、注重細節與主動性等確保執行效率的務實品質，對創造力等需求相對較低。
3. 在工作質量與福利方面呈現「基礎保障為主，但透明度嚴重不足」的特點。雖然五天工作制、月薪及核心福利相對普遍，但大量關鍵信息的缺失限制了求職者對職位「實質質量」的全面評估。 工作時間安排：五天工作週雖為市場常態（佔過半數），但大量職位（逾七成）未註明具體工時。同時，對每週少於20小時工作的需求（佔一成）相對顯著，反映市場存在彈性工時空間，惟清晰度與選項不足。 薪酬福利：月薪制及基本福利普遍，惟薪酬透明度嚴重不足。月薪制佔主導，年假、醫療、花紅是最常提及的福利。然而，過半數職位未披露具體薪酬水平，是評估工作質量的最大障礙；已披露的薪酬主要集中於中等水平（1.5萬至2.5萬港元）。 平等機會聲明：普遍缺位，多元共融意識有待加強。絕大多數（近九成）招聘廣告未包含平等就業機會的聲明，反映相關實踐重視不足。
二、行業聚焦（以進出口貿易、批發及零售業為例）：放大市場特徵與問題
作為勞動力需求大戶，進出口貿易、批發及零售業的招聘特徵印證並放大了整體市場趨勢：
1. 該行業職位更聚焦前線服務與基層，兼職需求更高，深刻反映了其以客戶互動和彈性人手調配為核心的運營模式，職位結構明顯比整體市場更為「向下沉」。 服務職能佔絕對主導（48.8%），遠超管理類（25.5%）及市場平均。 兼職比例顯著偏高（19.1%），遠超市場平均（13.2%）。 職級需求極度偏向初級（54.5%），遠超市場平均（40.7%），高中層需求比例均低於整體。
2. 技能要求更顯著的「低門檻、重實踐」。該行業對求職者的硬技能要求普遍遠低於市場平均水平，更側重吸納能快速投入基礎崗位的人員；軟技能側重點亦有不同。 學歷門檻顯著更低（63.8%明確無需特定學歷）。 語言要求相對寬鬆，大量職位未明確要求。 基礎數碼技能需求偏低（28.8% vs 整體39.7%）。 專業資格要求極少（\u3c 5%）。 軟技能更強調「熱情」（34.2%），取代了整體市場中對「注意細節」的高度關注。
3. 工作福利與質量：靈活性更高，透明度問題更嚴重。該行業提供了更多彈性選項，但伴隨著更嚴峻的信息不透明，尤其在薪酬結構和平等機會披露方面。 工作時間：提供低工時/彈性選項比例更高（2-3天工作合計近20%，\u3c 20小時/週佔11.8%）。 薪酬福利：薪酬更集中於中低水平（1萬-2萬）；時薪制更普遍（19.3%）；薪酬月數信息缺失極為嚴重（68.4%未註明）。 平等機會披露：透明度極差，高達94.9%未提及平權聲明，劣於市場平均。
基於本研究揭示的香港招聘市場結構性特徵與挑戰，特別是考慮到中美貿易競爭及關稅戰對香港支柱產業（如進出口貿易）構成的直接衝擊，茲向特區政府相關部門提出以下五點核心政策建議： 應對貿易衝擊，加速職業轉型： 為緩解中美關稅戰對相關行業（貿易、物流、部分零售）就業的直接影響，需要強化及調整僱員再培訓局 (ERB) 及職訓局 (VTC) 課程，重點推動受影響員工向具增長潛力的新領域（如綠色經濟、醫療保健、創科輔助崗位）進行技能轉移，並提升培訓津貼；同時，需檢討失業支援，研究設立短期失業專項援助。 檢討與完善靈活就業保障： 因應零工經濟趨勢及兼職比例上升，需全面檢討現行勞工法例對靈活就業者的適用性（尤其工傷、醫保、強積金MPF等方面），並參考國際經驗探索創新的保障模式。 策略性提升未來數碼技能： 儘管當前高端技術需求不高，仍需前瞻性佈局，一方面強化普及數碼素養，另一方面透過資助及課程開發，策略性提升AI、大數據等前沿技術培訓，為經濟長遠轉型及應對外部挑戰儲備人才。 優先提升工時透明度： 針對大量職位未披露工時的普遍問題，建議要求招聘廣告列明預計工作時數範圍；對標準工時立法問題可考慮分階段或分行業推進。 規範招聘信息披露： 解決薪酬、福利等關鍵信息缺失問題，應透過具約束力的守則或法規，要求招聘廣告披露薪金範圍、支付方式、主要福利等，並由勞工處監察執行；同時，鼓勵僱主自願加入平等機會 (DEI) 聲明。https://commons.ln.edu.hk/ccrd_report/1006/thumbnail.jp
Lingnan Gardeners Newsletter (No. 73) = 彩園通訊 (第73期)
No full texthttps://commons.ln.edu.hk/ln_gardeners_newsletter/1073/thumbnail.jp
How many cultural dimensions do we need?
No full textThe research on culture as a pattern of values, attitudes, beliefs, and norms that differentiates countries or other units from another has reached the point where the abundance of different cultural models, all offering various cultural dimensions, might be rather confusing than helping. However, it can be reasonable to assume that different models cover the same cultural elements while grouping those elements in different ways. Based on already published theoretical and empirical research and new analyses, this presentation will discuss how different cultural models align with each other and with objective indicators describing various social, economic, and political phenomena. After all, although most interesting for researchers as it is, culture is a research topic also because we are interested in how cultural differences explain differences in various other phenomena and why different societies differ in how successful they are in managing various societal challenges. The presentation searches for answers to the following questions. Are two cultural dimensions enough to capture modern cultural differences across the world? How much do we need to explain the differences between societies? Is there one default cultural model that we can rely on from now on? Or is this picture still more nuanced
Individualism-collectivism : reconstructing Hofstede’s dimension of cultural differences
No full textIndividualism-Collectivism (I-C), a key concept in cross-cultural research and one of the most researched context variables in personality, social and developmental psychology, is often treated as synonymous with Hofstede’s pioneering nation scores. These scores face growing concerns about their validity, but subsequent research has not produced a widely accepted alternative. In Study 1, we systematically evaluated Hofstede’s I-C index, revealing inferior convergent and nomological validity compared to subsequent measures. Specific biases in Hofstede’s scores overestimate the individualism of English-speaking countries and collectivism of East Asian societies, which may perpetuate cultural stereotypes and underpin flawed theorizing. We illustrate how relying on Hofstede’s scores can bias research findings. In Study 2, we aimed to develop an authoritative, theory-driven I-C index, using nationally representative data from the World Values Survey and European Values Study, covering 102 countries/territories inhabited by 88% of the world’s population. Our index shows excellent internal coherence and temporal stability and outperforms Hofstede’s I-C in associations with a nomological network of 28 societal indicators theoretically linked to I-C. We argue for an overdue paradigm shift in cross-cultural research: scholars should rely on theoretically appropriate and up-to-date measures of societal culture when seeking to understand global variation in human psychological functioning
The mismeasure of culture : why measurement invariance is rarely appropriate for research in social, cultural, and political psychology
No full textMy talk critiques the indiscriminate application of measurement invariance in psychology. Despite the growing recognition of the need for cross-cultural validation of measures in psychological studies, a tension persists between proponents of measurement invariance and practitioners frustrated with these stringent standards and ambiguous recommendations. I argue that cultural constructs need not be equivalent or invariant as long as they demonstrate external validity at the group level. Measurement invariance emerged from concerns about fairness in high-stakes individual selections; however, its meta-theoretical assumptions are irrelevant to many (if not most) cross-cultural studies, where researchers aim to uncover group differences. I illustrate my point using the General System Justification Scale, which has recently faced criticism for lacking invariance. I show that external validation can ensure meaningful group differences without establishing invariance criteria. I suggest that researchers determine the purpose of scale use and clarify ontological assumptions before applying measurement invariance methods. At its core, the debate over the use of measurement invariance overlooks philosophical questions regarding how to theorize and study culture. These questions, in my opinion, need to be addressed to advance the field
Comparative civilizational turn : how research on civilizational security and social cohesion tacitly fuels the return of civilizations to geopolitical forecasting
No full textThe 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine went unpredicted by many superforecasters. A major reason for this failure is the overlooking of civilizational identities—international collective identities combining cultural scripts, political culture, religions and institutional traditions—that shape global state systems. Without acknowledging these identities, analyses often rely on a simplistic Kantian rationality, ignoring cultural influences on state behavior. At the International Society for the Comparative Study of Civilizations (ISCSC), we argue that states seek not only geopolitical but also civilizational security, rooted in relational civilizational networks. Comparative civilizational analysis is thus crucial for accurate geopolitical forecasting. Since its founding in 1961 by Arnold Toynbee and Pitirim Sorokin, influential ISCSC members such as Samuel Huntington and Immanuel Wallerstein have echoed this view in their theoretical works. As of 2025, comparative civilizational research is thriving, albeit tacitly, across diverse fields—sociology, anthropology, political science, game theory, and Al modeling. Comparative researchers explore cultural zones, social imaginaries, and the evolution of historical polities. Integrating these insights under the common umbrella of comparative civilizations” could foster pluralistic frameworks to understand civilizations as multilayered, dynamic networks, essential for policymaking and advancing academic theory. Such integration offers promise for a new comparative civilizational turn