1,720,961 research outputs found

    Interpreters, Translators, and the Spoken Word in the Nineteenth-Century Transatlantic Slave Trade to Brazil and Cuba

    No full text
    Interpreters and translators played a central role in the transatlantic slave trade in the nineteenth century. Some helped traffickers. Others aided in the suppression of the slave trade. On land, Mixed Courts of Justice for the Suppression of the Transatlantic Slave Trade (1819–71) employed interpreters and translators. Courts in Havana and Rio de Janeiro along with seven other Courts situated throughout the Atlantic Basin heard more than six hundred cases and “liberated” some 100,000 Africans taken off captured slave vessels. At sea, interpreters interviewed enslaved Africans on board captured slave ships to provide information to British naval officers. Numerous interpreters and translators were Africans or African descendants. Using language skills and knowledge of the Atlantic world, these “Atlantic Creoles” defended personal freedoms and the human rights of others during the Age of Revolutions (1760–1850). Two episodes are noted in which enslaved blacks spoke fluent Eng lish as a means to convince British and United States officials that they merited immediate emancipation.</jats:p

    Slavery and the Rise of the Atlantic System

    No full text

    Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis

    Get PDF
    The present study examines one of the fundamental aspects of author co-citation analysis (ACA) - the way co-citation counts are defined. Co-citation counting provides the data on which all subsequent statistical analyses and mappings are based, and we compare ACA results based on two different types of co-citation counting - the traditional type that only counts the first one among a cited work's authors on the one hand and a non-traditional type that takes into account the first 5 authors of a cited work on the other hand. Results indicate that the picture produced through this non-traditional author co-citation counting contains more coherent author groups and is therefore considerably clearer. However, this picture represents fewer specialties in the research field being studied than that produced through the traditional first-author co-citation counting when the same number of top-ranked authors is selected and analyzed. Reasons for these effects are discussed
    corecore