620 research outputs found
EFFECTS OF TOTAL DISSOLVED SOLIDS ON BIOLOGICAL WASTEWATER TREATMENT USING A SEQUENCING BATCH REACTOR
No full textMaster'sMASTER OF ENGINEERIN
58.5 Shared Experience of Developing Pediatric Consultation Liaison Psychiatry in Singapore
No full text
The Oral Aural Walter Ong
No full textThis is a transcription of Abigail Lambke\u27s words during the audio piece “The Oral Aural Walter Ong. During the piece, Abigail intersperses her own commentary with excerpts from two of Ong\u27s recorded lectures: “The End of the Age of Literacy, and “The Future of Literacy. Walter Ong explicitly barred transcription of one of these lectures, exclusively granting permission for the piece to be reproduced in audio. To honor that request, none of Ong\u27s words will be transcribed here. The Oral Aural Walter Ong Music: Kevin MacLeod “Peace Of Mind Hello. I am Abigail Lambke and this is “The Oral Aural Walter Ong, an audio essay for Harlot\u27s Sonic Rhetorics Issue. Many of us are familiar with the name Walter Ong, and some of us have read him, either pieces of his famous Orality and Literacy, or the often anthologized “The Writer\u27s Audience is Always a Fiction. Ong\u27s scholarship was concerned with sound, with the transition from oral culture to literate culture, and the way technology impacts communication. In that way, Ong was a forerunner of Sonic Rhetorics because his scholarship suggests how sounded words, or oral/aural words, affect the relationship of language to knowledge. Many of us have read him, but how many have listened to him? I mean listened not metaphorically, but literally listened to his voice. In this audio essay, I contend that in listening to Walter Ong, we can expand our understanding of his scholarship and approach to sonic rhetoric. Listening to him, like when he talks about the electronic age, saying: *Excerpt from Walter Ong\u27s “The End of the Age of Literacy” Voice is coming back into its own. Walter Ong said that in 1960. But voice has been ignored by rhetoric, except as a metaphor in text. If we treat voice as voice, however, how can listening to Walter Ong\u27s voice expand our understanding of his scholarship? The central purpose of this audio essay is to argue that listening to Ong\u27s aural presence reveals new and intriguing considerations of Ong and his scholarship. Foremost, the act of listening provides insight into how sonic rhetorics have their own set of intricacies and complications. In this audio essay, I integrate clips from two of Ong\u27s recorded lectures, one a recorded lecture for the Songs of Learning Series taped in 1960, called “The End of the Age of Literacy,” and the second a live recording at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, in 1975, called “The Future of Literacy. Both of these lectures are hosted online in full by the Walter J. Ong Archival Collection from Saint Louis University. I\u27ve divided the audio essay into three sections: the first section, “Listening to Walter Ong, explores what is special in listening to the sonic qualities of Ong\u27s recorded lectures; the second, “Ong\u27s Sound Arguments, presents Ong\u27s arguments on the difference between sound and writing; and the third, “Evolving Ong, discusses some ways sound has evolved from where Ong was in the electronic age to where we are in the digital one. Part 1: Listening to Walter Ong (3:35) Music: Podington Bear “Happiness Is I want to start with a sound truism: Listening is a different experience than reading. In listening to a voice, we make assumptions; we key into tonal inflections and volume shifts that indicate emphasis or aspects of personality. And although the academic profession privileges written compositions, for many academics our professional life is more about an oral/aural presence than a printed one. A fruitful scholar writes a few books and a few dozen articles over the course of a career that reach an audience of hundreds or possibly thousands. But during the same career, the same scholar will deliver scores of presentations, teach on thousands of class days, and have uncountable academic conversations. Indeed, the oral/aural presence is fundamentally central to an academic life. And while there is an emphasis on rhetorics of writing and reading, we pay less purposeful attention to the sonic rhetorics of speaking and listening. A rhetoric of sound is concerned with how an oral/aural medium, like a lecture, affects the relationship of words to knowing. Because listening is a different experience than reading, a delivered lecture cannot be just like written prose. This is something Walter Ong certainly understood; and his lectures, although similar in thesis to his books and articles, are also very different experiences. For example, although you might have suspected that Walter Ong had a sense of humor from reading his prose, it is much more evident when listening to a live-taped recording. Here, at a speech to an academic audience at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, he explains the idea of the oral/aural by making a jest at the phonemic system of Midwesterners:*Excerpt from Walter Ong\u27s “The Future of Literacy * Here he spices up the difference between television and film with a joke about hospitality. *Excerpt from Walter Ong\u27s “The Future of Literacy * I\u27m not saying that Ong should have gone into stand-up, but he did have a sense of his audience, who seem grateful to have a little comic relief in a lecture called “The Future of Literacy. Humor is one aspect encouraged in a sonic environment, where the audience can hear the inflection and the twist of language. Another insight we can get from listening to Walter Ong is from a non-live lecture, “The End of the Age of Literacy, which Ong taped and obviously meant to have edited before others listened to it. However, the archived version remains unedited, so when Ong flubs a line, the flub is included alongside the fix. We can hear him playing with basic word order: *Excerpt from Walter Ong\u27s “The End of the Age of Literacy * Or correcting a simple misspeak: *Excerpt from Walter Ong\u27s “The End of the Age of Literacy * Unlike a rigorously edited printed manuscript, when we as readers only see the revised finished product, an oral/aural presentation allows for more dynamism, and with dynamism, some mistakes. In print, Ong is forceful and confident, but in this oral artifact, we can hear the humanity inherent in the evanescence of oral language. Written prose is revised, sculpted. Oral language exists in the moment, and while it might aim for perfection, some cracks are excused. In sonic rhetorics, perfection in pronunciation is not demanded. No one can do it all on a first take, nor should we be able to. Knowing that even Walter Ong didn\u27t have a perfect first take is encouragement for us all when we flub a line. Another quality of listening to a scholar is hearing the resonance of his or her voice. In Ong\u27s voice, there is an even-ness there, a definite Midwestern and early 20th century shape to the words. In listening to Ong it is impossible to avoid that he was a man born and raised in Missouri in the early 20th century. It is in his voice. We can hear it. The first time I heard a recording of Walter Ong, his voice reminded me of Jimmy Stewart, especially in his folksy intellectual roles, like The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance. *Jimmy Stewart The Man Who Shoe Liberty Valance: “Why did you do it? * Although Walter Ong is less dramatic. In listening to Walter Ong we can hear him trying to communicate with his audience, deliver something new about the difference between sound and writing while sounding approachable, likeable, and sometimes folksy. This is his sonic ethos. For example, here in his discussion of images and spoken language, he offers a concept followed by an example, followed by a joke: *Excerpt from Walter Ong\u27s “The End of the Age of Literacy * Ong\u27s oral aural approach is calculated to be steady, sociable, and accessible. He was not one to talk incomprehensibly in the haze of high theory. In listening to Ong, you hear more than just vocal tone and pitch inflection, but how he used his voice to craft a persona that was humorous, approachable, and overall human. Because listening is a different experience than reading, because a sonic rhetoric is a distinct set of concerns, in listening to Walter Ong, you can come to know him and his arguments in a new way. Part 2: Ong\u27s Sound Arguments (11:10) Music: Podington Bear “Sneaker Chase For Ong, sound was what made up real words, unlike writing, which imitated language in an artificial way. Sound was special and natural for Ong. He listed many different aspects of sound in his lectures, but there is one phrase which is present in almost all of his lectures, as well as many of his interviews and essays. Indeed, it is in both of the recordings I am using for this audio essay. In 1960, he said it like this: *Excerpt from Walter Ong\u27s “The End of the Age of Literacy * And in 1975 he said it this way: *Excerpt from Walter Ong\u27s “The Future of Literacy * The direct parallel between these quotes is obvious, but that parallel is not as compelling as why Ong returned to this saying not only in these two speeches, but in any lecture close to this topic. As someone who studied orality and sound, Ong was not afraid of repetition, of commonplaces, of repetition. He knew that a good nugget, which the existence nugget is, is something that an audience will appreciate, even if they\u27ve heard it before. And Ong scholars will repeat it themselves, as Lance Strate does in his centenary Pecha Kucha for Ong *Excerpt from Lance Strate\u27s “The Word (A Pecha Kucha on the Walter Ong Centenary) * And this nugget emphasizes what is so precious about sound. You cannot hold it in your fingers. You cannot pause it and keep it. Sound is evanescent. In going out of existence in the moment, it is ephemeral. Even when recorded, as these pieces of Ong are, they are still immaterial. And, what is more, to be fully comprehended by most of us, they must be listened to in isolation. For instance, if I played the last three clips, all of which contain similar language, at the same time, it becomes massively confusing. Concurrent: *Excerpt from Walter Ong\u27s “The End of the Age of Literacy Excerpt from Walter Ong\u27s “The Future of Literacy * Excerpt from Lance Strate\u27s “The Word (A Pecha Kucha on the Walter Ong Centenary) * This is not near as effective as listening in sequence. Writing is, of course, different. We could have all three quotes present at once to compare them word for word. You can look backward in writing, or forward. But sound isn\u27t like this. With sound, you have to listen to language in sequence. You have to be patient. For Ong, what was truly fascinating were the ways speaking and writing interacted and how that had changed across the centuries. He was fond of impressing the change upon his audience. He\u27d say: *Excerpt from Walter Ong\u27s “The End of the Age of Literacy * In the audio essay you are listening to now, that procedure had changed further from that used by Ong. I wrote out a script beforehand, true, but only by listening and then writing, then re-listening and revising. Then recording and listening, and revising, and re-recording. Then, I edited audio clips with software programs that are themselves written entities, adding music composed by others, and finally producing the audio file you are listening to now. This is far from both Cicero\u27s and Ong\u27s process of composition. But in the end, it is another oral event. And oral events have their own texture, their own experience, as well as their own rhetoric, as the practice of listening to Walter Ong suggests. When we compare spoken and written words, Ong advises that: *Excerpt from Walter Ong\u27s “The End of the Age of Literacy * And not only are spoken and written words, or textual and sonic rhetorics, different, they change when technology changes. In ruminating on the future of communication and sound, Ong says: *Excerpt from Walter Ong\u27s “The Future of Literacy * Part 3: Evolving Ong (18:30) Music: Jared Balogh “Caught In a Realm Ong generously left the future for those of us in the future, and part of this responsibility to is listen to him, and to see how sound and sonic rhetoric have changed since. The dynamics of sound have changed in the digital age, because digitalization both freezes sound and makes it more malleable. While sound could be frozen onto records or tapes when Ong delivered his lectures, it still existed in a static form, in a continuous, or analog track. These were difficult to modify with much precision, especially without expertise, funds, or equipment. This is no longer the case. To see this change, let\u27s consider a clause Ong put at the beginning of that taped recording at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champagne in 1975. *Excerpt from Walter Ong\u27s “The Future of Literacy * But Walter Ong, who would want to get you into trouble? Not, I, certainly. But the trouble that I could do with a transcription is not near as much fun as what I can do now with your recording. I can edit it, either respectfully as I have been doing so far, or, more playfully. With a click of a button I can make you sound like a chipmunk: *Chipmunked Walter Ong* I can make you echo like you are shouting into a canyon: *Echoing Walter Ong Ong Ong* Or, as far as my admittedly minor editing skills allow, I can, horror of horrors, Auto Tune you: *Auto-Tuned Walter Ong / Music: SJ Mellia “Reverse Selector * Manipulating Ong is fun, but I do it for more than just the fun of it. Playing with Ong\u27s now-digitized lecture is evidence of how Ong could not foresee the future of sound. For Ong in 1975, an oral lecture, even a taped one, was a safe place. Writing was dangerous; written words could be duplicated, and it could get you into trouble. Oral/aural words, on the other hand, were safe. They wouldn\u27t be spliced, or taken out of context, or manipulated in dangerous ways. This is certainly no longer the case. Sound is malleable now, in ways that it simply wasn\u27t in 1975. There is no longer safety in sound. For example, I can rearrange elements that Walter Ong said any way I want. Fr. Ong, what do you think is the most important area of study? *Excerpt from Walter Ong\u27s “The Future of Literacy * And what should we all be studying within the discipline of rhetoric? *Excerpt from Walter Ong\u27s “The Future of Literacy * Right. Thanks for the advice, I agree. Hey, what do you think we should call this essay? *Excerpt from Walter Ong\u27s “The End of the Age of Literacy * Ahh, good idea. My listeners will take my point. The malleability of digital sound recordings means I have the ability to take anything Walter Ong has recorded and do what I wish with it using minimal technology and software I downloaded from the Internet. This sounds dire; but it isn\u27t as worrisome as all that. Just like composing in any other medium, composing using others\u27 recorded voices has its great abilities and its great responsibilities. Sonic rhetorics have an ethics, just as written rhetorics do. As a scholar who studies Walter Ong, I don\u27t want to get him into trouble. Nor do I want to get my own self into trouble. But I do want to call attention to the way sound has evolved and the new places for rhetorical scholarship. What respect do we owe those we reproduce with our own commentary? What position should be afforded them? I have no pat answers for you here; the resolution of that issue is something to reflect on further, as the production of sonic pieces continue. What I want to suggest is that sound isn\u27t safe, like it was for Walter Ong in 1975. But that isn\u27t a bad thing. What it means is that sound has a power it didn\u27t have before; it is more and more an available means of persuasion, in Aristotelian terms, as sonic artifacts like podcasts, audiobooks, audio tours, and other sound pieces are produced. Sound is less safe, but it is becoming more powerful. Conclusion: The Oral Aural Everybody (24:00) Music: Podington Bear “Wavy Glass In listening to Walter Ong, we can come to understand his scholarship in a new way. Ong\u27s lectures have the same central theses as his written work, but because speaking and listening are distinct and intricate practices, engaging with an Oral/Aural Walter Ong reveals the way he approached sonic rhetoric, not only in theory, but also in practice. In hearing him we hear his humor and warmth, his sincerity, but also his fallibility. We can hear where he falls short, where he flubs a line, where he coughs, where he underestimates sound and technology. Walter Ong is not the only late scholar with an oral collection. One implication of this audio essay is to encourage others to find the scholars you quote in textual documents and listen to them. Listen to their recorded voices and reflect on what you hear. In listening to long pieces, you learn how people breathe, how they make jokes, how they recover from a flubbed line, how they interact with an audience. In listening to their active voices they might come alive for you in a new way. In this audio essay, I have hinted at the ways sonic rhetoric brings alive concepts of rhetoric and composition that have been metaphors, like voice, tone, or rhythm. In sound these are not metaphors; they are actual and active. Many scholars have written on rhetorical delivery in new media, working to revive the canon of delivery. But in presenting the importance of the oral/aural in scholarly life: in presentations, lectures, conversations, I\u27d argue that delivery was never unimportant, it was merely unexamined. In listening to Walter Ong in these lectures from 1960 and 1975, we can hear his delivery, how he makes vocal choices throughout. Ong certainly was examining his delivery and consciously crafting a vocal ethos. But then again, he was Jesuit with classical training as well as a homilist who frequently said Mass. He was trained in delivery in a way many scholars now are not. But perhaps they should be, now more than ever. If sound is becoming more powerful, and more of what you say can be recorded and used elsewhere, it behooves everyone to begin to pay more attention to oral delivery. My second implication is to ask you, my audience: What do you sound like? What does your audience hear in your voice? Whether you are an academic or not, it can be vitally important to hear your own oral/aural self. To understand your own approach to Sonic Rhetoric. So record yourself and listen. And thank you for listening to me. This has been Abigail Lambke. Goodbye
Factors affecting the ozonation of phenanthrene in soil media
No full textIn this study the feasibility of applying ozone as a chemical pretreatment for soil remediation was examined through a series of soil column experiments. The factors investigated included: moisture content, organic content, stabilization of gaseous ozone with sulfuric acid, and ferrous content on ozone decomposition and how these factors affected the degradation of phenanthrene.
The moisture content of a soil system must be maintained above approximately 0.5 % by weight in order to minimize ozone decomposition. The use of a strong acid as a ozone stabilizing agent was found to be ineffective, with any beneficial aspects being related to maintaining the moisture content of the soil column. The consumption of ozone due to the organic content increased exponentially as the organic carbon content of the soil increased. Increasing the iron content of the soil matrix greatly increased the decomposition of ozone. Iron contents of one percent or more greatly reduced the effectiveness of ozone in decomposing the target organic contaminant. The removal of phenanthrene was most efficient for an organic carbon content of0.9 %. The reduced removal efficiency at greater organic carbon contents was probably due to the exponential increase in ozone decomposition discussed above. Removal rates of phenanthrene at lower organic carbon contents may have been due to the soil drying out, thus increasing the decomposition of ozone before it could react with the target compound
Marxist reading of selected works of Bob Ong: (a study of the popular culture)
No full textThe popularly advocated has the tendency to feign the objective reality, and replace it with a subjective analysis of the actual conditions. The same assumption applies to popular literature-that the author tends to remake reality according to how perceives it and how he wants it to be perceived.
This study is basically a Marxist reading of the selected works of Bob Ong. Together, the study glances over popular culture from which the text is identified among the genre of the popular literature. In the pool of contemporary creative writer, Bob Ong stands reflective of the existing culture. This is readily perceived in the language and the formal elements that indicate the strong influence of the popular culture to the author.
Various theories and critiques are already made on popular culture. But for this study alone, the definition is trimmed down to a culture that is drawn from the inherent experiences of man (from below), but is manipulated by the upper class (from above). Emphasis is given to the latter, and to the contention that popular culture is commodified for capital acquisition of the dominant few.
In this study, the Marxist approach is holistic as it is used first, in defining the scope of popular culture (Dialectical materialism), and again, in the actual reading of the text (Economic determinism). The claims of this study are grounded also on the Marxist belief that there is a prevailing social stratification that propels the incessant struggle between classes.
On the premise that the author is a purveyor of the popular culture, he therefore promotes the prevalence of the existing status quo from which he benefits. Intersubjectivity explains that with the choice of language and details incorporated in his narratives, Ong carries a consciousness espoused by the petty-bourgeoisie. And Marx\u27s Economic Determinism fortifies this by stating that the social being (economic being) begets the individual\u27s consciousness (ideology).
The study proceeds with the three-phase textual interpretation of Terry Eagleton that uncloaks Ong\u27s works to reveal the kind of reality that is being presented by the text. It begins with having identified the petty-bourgeois of the author and of the text.
In identifying the contradictions within the text, the study recognizes the realism in Ong\u27s works. In the four selected books, the contradiction in the state of education, the Philippine politics and culture, and the conflict between the dominant and the dominated are presented to the readers.
However, these fragments of realism will not suffice as in this case that the text is subjected to the standards of a Marxist textual interpretation. The author is found guilty of the petty-bourgeois tendency that fails to see wider scope of societal oppression and contradiction. Ong remains confined in the moral world of his class whose concerns are limited to an urban and popular lifestyle, and discounts the genuine mass literature of the workers, peasants, and of other sectors that comprise the large number of the true masses.
With this, Ong also fails to provide a substantial resolution or any call to transform the social contradictions even to those that he has presented at the very least. And logically, failure to instigate change is an action to preserve the already existing order of the dominant versus the dominated classes
Learning electronic circuit via building an Arduino frequency synthesizer
No full textE-learning has evolved from a niche type of teaching for tech-related subjects to being
a preferred, growing and almost necessary way to teach everything else. As
technological capabilities advance, the growing demand for self-paced, flexible
learning has allowed e-learning to become a priority for many organizations. However,
this shift of learning has come at a cost. The touch of physical learning has been lost
from the older days, which once fostered deeper values and a richer understanding.
This report aims to design a simple yet effective hardware and software project for
users to follow step by step and build an audio synthesizer from scratch using Arduino.
The user would learn how to bring together basic components to build the synthesizer
and write up the code to enable the Arduino to function as a synthesizer generator. The
user will also be able to modify the code to further understand the synthesizer and its
controls.Bachelor's degre
Interleukin-1 Receptor Antagonist and Interleukin-4 Genes Variable Number Tandem Repeats Are Associated with Adiposity in Malaysian Subjects
No full textInterleukin-1 receptor antagonist (IL1RA) intron 2 86 bp repeat and interleukin-4 (IL4) intron 3 70 bp repeat are variable number tandem repeats (VNTRs) that have been associated with various diseases, but their role in obesity is elusive. The objective of this study was to investigate the association of IL1RA and IL4 VNTRs with obesity and adiposity in 315 Malaysian subjects (128 M/187 F; 23 Malays/251 ethnic Chinese/41 ethnic Indians). The allelic distributions of IL1RA and IL4 were significantly different among ethnicities, and the alleles were associated with total body fat (TBF) classes. Individuals with IL1RA I/II genotype or allele II had greater risk of having higher overall adiposity, relative to those having the I/I genotype or I allele, respectively, even after controlling for ethnicity [Odds Ratio (OR) of I/II genotype = 12.21 (CI = 2.54, 58.79; p=0.002); II allele = 5.78 (CI = 1.73, 19.29; p=0.004)]. However, IL4 VNTR B2 allele was only significantly associated with overall adiposity status before adjusting for ethnicity [OR = 1.53 (CI = 1.04, 2.23; p=0.03)]. Individuals with IL1RA II allele had significantly higher TBF than those with I allele (31.79±2.52 versus 23.51±0.40; p=0.005). Taken together, IL1RA intron 2 VNTR seems to be a genetic marker for overall adiposity status in Malaysian subjects
- …
