1,720,985 research outputs found
Recommended from our members
Truth and Speech Acts, Studies in the philosophy of language
Full text link
Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis
Full text linkThe 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
Variations on the Author
Full text link“Variations on the Author” discusses two of Eduardo Coutinho’s recent films (Um Dia na Vida, from 2010, and Últimas Conversas, posthumously released in 2015) and their contribution to the general question of documentary authorship. The director’s filmography is characterized by a consistent yet self-effacing form of authorial self-inscription: Coutinho often features as an interviewer that rather than express opinions propels discourses; an interviewer that is good at listening. This mode of self-inscription characterizes him as an author who is not expressive but who is nonetheless markedly present on the screen. In Um Dia na Vida, however, Coutinho is completely absent form the image, while Últimas Conversas, on the contrary, includes a confessional prologue that moves the director from the margins to the center of his films. This article examines the ways in which these works stand out in the filmography of a director who offers new insights into the notion of cinematic authorship
Appropriate Similarity Measures for Author Cocitation Analysis
Full text linkWe provide a number of new insights into the methodological discussion about author cocitation analysis. We first argue that the use of the Pearson correlation for measuring the similarity between authors’ cocitation profiles is not very satisfactory. We then discuss what kind of similarity measures may be used as an alternative to the Pearson correlation. We consider three similarity measures in particular. One is the well-known cosine. The other two similarity measures have not been used before in the bibliometric literature. Finally, we show by means of an example that our findings have a high practical relevance.information science;Pearson correlation;cosine;similarity measure;author cocitation analysis
Frege's Puzzle: Glezakos e a legitimidade do enigma
No full textGottlob Frege apresenta, em seu texto Sobre o Sentido e a Referência, o que tradicionalmente é nomeado como Frege's Puzzle: sentenças de identidade verdadeiras, apesar de designarem o mesmo objeto, possuem valores cognitivos distintos. Para responder a esse enigma, Frege argumenta que a diferença entre os valores cognitivos das sentenças de identidade é explicável aplicando a sua distinção entre sentido (Sinn) e referência (Bedeutung). No texto Can Frege Pose Frege's Puzzle?, a autora Stavroula Glezakos defende que Frege não formula um enigma genuíno. Ela argumenta que Frege pressupõe sua distinção entre sentido e referência na formulação do enigma e então soluciona-o com essa mesma distinção, concluindo que o problema dos distintos valores cognitivos entre as diferentes sentenças de identidade apresentado por Frege não deve ser aceito. O objetivo geral da monografia é analisar os argumentos de Glezakos acerca dos argumentos de Frege no alegado enigma.Gottlob Frege presents, in his text On Sense and Reference, which is traditionally named as Frege's Puzzle: true identity sentences, despite designating the same object, they have distinct cognitive values. To answer this puzzle, Frege argues that difference between cognitive values of identity sentences is explained by applying his distinction between sense (Sinn) and reference (Bedeutung). In the text Can Frege Pose Frege's Puzzle?, the author Stavroula Glezakos defends that Frege does not formulate a genuine puzzle. She argues that Frege presupposes his distinction between sense and reference in the formulation of the puzzle and then solve it with this same distinction, concluding that the problem of different cognitive values among distinct identity sentences presented by Frege should not be accepted. The general objective of the monograph is to analyze Glezakos' arguments about Frege's arguments in the alleged puzzle
Illocutionary logic as a tool for reconstructing Kant’s derivation of the formula of the categorical imperative from its mere concept
No full textThis paper aims to reconstruct Kant’s derivation of the formula of the categorical imperative from its mere concept with the help of the resources of Searle’s and Vanderveken’s illocutionary logic. The main exegetical hypothesis is that the derivation envisaged by Kant consists in deriving the formula from the success conditions of categorical imperatives. These conditions, which are analogous to the success conditions of ordinary orders, contain restrictions for the successful construction of a system of moral laws that determine what the content of the categorical imperative must be
The Semantic Significance of Frege’s Puzzle
No full textIn “Can Frege Pose Frege’s Puzzle?”, Stavroula Glezakos argues that Frege’s puzzle about the cognitive significance of identity statements does not have the status of a genuine problem of semantics. The puzzle arises only on the condition that Frege’s specific solution of the puzzle is accepted. From this she concludes that Frege cannot really pose his puzzle. Neither Non-Fregeans nor Fregeans should be puzzled by it. The aim of this paper is to show that Glezakos’ deflationary assessment of the puzzle cannot be sustained. It is argued that Frege’s puzzle does not refer to the semantic analysis of natural language, as Glezakos and also Howard Wettstein assume, but to the construction of a semantic interpretation for the language of science that allows us to communicate our cognitive acts and attitudes in an adequate way. So understood, the puzzle has the status of a genuine problem whose solution is a key problem of semantics.En “¿Puede Frege formular el puzzle de Frege?”, Stavroula Glezakos argumenta que el puzzle de Frege respecto del significado cognitivo de los enunciados de identidad no tiene el estatus de un genuino problema de la semántica. El puzzle surge solamente bajo la siguiente condición: que la solución específica fregeana del puzzle sea aceptada. A partir de esto, Glezakos concluye que Frege no puede realmente formular su puzzle. Ni los no-fregeanos ni los fregeanos deberían desconcertarse por este. El propósito de este artículo es mostrar que la evaluación deflacionaria, de Glezakos, del puzzle no puede sustentarse. Se argumenta que el puzzle de Frege no se refiere al análisis semántico del lenguaje natural, como lo asumen Glezakos y Howard Wettstein, sino a la construcción de una interpretación semántica para el lenguaje de la ciencia, el cual nos permite comunicar de una manera adecuada nuestros actos y actitudes cognitivos. Así entendido, el puzzle tiene el estatus de un genuino problema, cuya solución es un problema clave de la semántica
- …
