27 research outputs found
Rapture: A Study in Pathos and Scenography
No full textThis article presents Aby Warburg’s art historical approach as a potential guide for scenographic creation and analysis, forwarding Rapture as an example: a song cycle presented by Sydney Festival 2021 to a live and livestreamed audience. The author designed the set and costumes for Rapture and here reflects upon the following questions: can Warburg’s appreciation for “emotive formulas” and “engrams” assist in the making of compelling scenography when conditions for live performance are so altered from the standard? How does a design methodology championing synoptics, analytics and empathy, as Warburg did, integrate within a broader collaboration? Reconstructing Rapture’s design evolution, this study looks to the Laocoön Group, Il Medico and geometries associated with hypnosis as three persuasive pathos carriers. It finds that scenographic focus, potency and expediency arise from the proposed methodology
Collaboration and the Modern Chinese-language Self-translator
No full textThis article examines how Chinese-language self-translators have worked with co-translators and collaborators over the last century. The first study of its kind, it surveys a vast terrain, including mainland China and Taiwan, and places further afield. From the analysis of bibliographical sources, published works and their paratexts, letters, and written testimonies, this article details first the complex theoretical and methodological issues to be negotiated when researching these phenomena. It then explores the marked prevalence of collaborative authorship in the self-translation of literary texts in Chinese, noting the visibility or disclosure of the collaborators’ work in each instance and across periods generally, giving also an account of their motivations. It explores in depth the case of the Chinese writer, self-translator and Nobel laureate Gao Xingjian, finding that Gao’s work challenges a number of received ideas
about author-translator collaboration, such as the assumption that the author’s involvement necessarily restricts the translator’s freedom. By discussing how diverse cases exhibit the various modes of writing in which different parties engage during translation and revision, and how such types of collaboration are disclosed or effaced in the published work, this article seeks to establish clear theoretical terms for the study of collaboration and co-translation in
instances of self-translation
A Single Centre Experience With Arterio-Venous Extracorporeal Carbon Dioxide Removal To Facilitate Lung Protective Mechanical Ventilation
No full textTranslating Georges Simenon from the archives to the museum. The challenges of visibility and accessibility of literary and translation heritage in the digital age
No full textpeer reviewedBuilding on Ketelaar’s call for a shift in focus “from the archive as a product to the archive as a process” (2006:187), this paper will highlight the main challenges of the ULiège-based project SImenon en TRADuction (SITRAD), which aims to map and analyze Georges Simenon’s translation flows and to make his translation archives visible and accessible to a broader audience, including researchers. Understanding translation archives “both as a source of research objects and as an object of research” (Cordingley & Hersant 2021:9), this paper offers three contributions. On the one hand, by presenting the SITRAD translation database, we will explore how digital tools can instrumentalize translation archives to sharpen our understanding of the international circulation of the third most translated French-speaking author of all time. Special attention will be devoted to the diversity of players involved (e.g., literary agents, publishers, authors of fore or afterwords, translators, collection directors, etc.). On the other hand, we will elaborate on the archives as past and present mediators of Simenon’s oeuvre and as a “lieu de mémoire” (Nora 1996:14). We will assess the complex transnational human network of political, academic, cultural, and private actors involved in the preservation and dissemination of Simenon’s legacy, and especially, on their difficulties translating each other’s interests and, as such, gathering and showcasing Simenon's archives in the form of a museum. Finally, building on the objectives and challenges of the SITRAD project, we shall reflect on the possible interventions of researchers to facilitate the visibility and valorization of translation in society and to contribute to a finer understanding of literary internationalization and literary success. To do so, this contribution will cross insights from translation sociology (Callon 2006), the sociology of translation (Heilbron 2010, Roig Sanz & Fólica 2021), and critical approaches to digital humanities and digitized cultural heritage (Berry and Fagerjord, 2017).Cartographie de Simenon en traductions (SITRAD
Escrituras de minorías, ethos y (auto) traducción
No full textEl presente proyecto se propone afianzar y profundizar las tareas científicas y académicas ya realizadas por el equipo de investigación pero explora también nuevos problemas e interrogantes, que se desprenden del examen del ethos -la imagen discursiva que se asocia al responsable de la enunciación en el discurso narrativo ([auto] traducido) (Ducrot1984; Amossy 1999, 2009, 2012)- en relación con un corpus de textos plurilingüe (alemán, francés, español, inglés), escritos por mujeres, cuya obra se inscribe, en sentido amplio, en el ámbito de las escrituras de minorías. De este modo,se explora la configuración del ethos en un corpus que incluye textos que pueden incluirse dentro de la producción de distintos grupos de minorías étnicas, del mundo poscolonial y de la diáspora así como también en el ámbito de las escrituras del exilio y de las escrituras del yo. Las (auto) traducciones, también consideradas prácticas de escritura menor (Venuti 1995, 1998; Hermans [1996] 2010; Schiavi 1996; Baker 2000; Santoyo 2005; Cordingley 2013), resultan relevantes para abordar el problema de investigación que nos concierne aquí. Más específicamente, a partir de una metodología comparatista e interdisciplinaria, que aúna aportes de los estudios del discurso, la traductología y los estudios literarios, esta investigación busca dar respuesta a la observación de Maingueneau (2014) respecto de la falta de especificidad de los estudios sobre el ethos en el caso del discurso literario explorando la construcción de la imagen del responsable de la enunciación en distintos tipos específicos de discurso literario, en cuyo interior se problematizan, desde distintas ópticas, tanto la noción de ethos (autoral) (Ducrot 1984; Amossy 1999, 2009, 2010, 2012; Maingueneau 1999, 2002, 2013, 2014) como la de ethos del traductor (Suchet 2013; Spoturno 2013).This proposal aims at furthering the scientific and academic tasks already accomplished by the research team while it particularly explores new research problems and questions deriving from the study of ethos, that is, the discursive image attached to the enunciative subject assuming the responsibility for the enunciation of ([self] translated) narrative discourse (Ducrot 1984; Amossy 1999, 2009, 2012). Our plurilingual corpus (English, French, German, Spanish) of texts and translations, written by women, whose production falls within the domain of minority literatures seems adequate to address such a problem. Thus, the construction of ethos will be explored in a set of texts which can be included within the production of so-called ethnic, postcolonial literatures, diasporic writing as much as exile writing and the variations in the genre of self-writing. (Self) translations, largely regarded as minor writing practices (Venuti 1995, 1998; Hermans [1996] 2010; Schiavi 1996; Baker 2000; Santoyo 2005; Cordingley 2013), also become relevant to tackle the research problem at stake here. More specifically, through a comparative and interdisciplinary approach, informed by discourse studies, translation studies and literary studies alike, this proposal intends to answer Maingueneau´s (2014) query regarding the lack of specificity of ethos studies in literary discourse by exploring the construction of ethos in various and specific types of literary discourse, which problematize, from different angles, the notion of Author?s ethos (Ducrot 1984; Amossy 1999, 2009, 2010, 2012; Maingueneau 1999, 2002, 2013, 2014) as much as the Translator?s ethos (Suchet 2013; Spoturno 2013).Fil: Spoturno, María Laura. Universidad Nacional de La Plata. Facultad de Humanidades y Ciencias de la Educación. Instituto de Investigaciones en Humanidades y Ciencias Sociales (UNLP-CONICET); Argentina
Escrituras de minorías, ethos y (auto) traducción
No full textEl presente proyecto se propone afianzar y profundizar las tareas científicas y académicas ya realizadas por el equipo de investigación pero explora también nuevos problemas e interrogantes, que se desprenden del examen del ethos -la imagen discursiva que se asocia al responsable de la enunciación en el discurso narrativo ([auto] traducido) (Ducrot1984; Amossy 1999, 2009, 2012)- en relación con un corpus de textos plurilingüe (alemán, francés, español, inglés), escritos por mujeres, cuya obra se inscribe, en sentido amplio, en el ámbito de las escrituras de minorías. De este modo,se explora la configuración del ethos en un corpus que incluye textos que pueden incluirse dentro de la producción de distintos grupos de minorías étnicas, del mundo poscolonial y de la diáspora así como también en el ámbito de las escrituras del exilio y de las escrituras del yo. Las (auto) traducciones, también consideradas prácticas de escritura menor (Venuti 1995, 1998; Hermans [1996] 2010; Schiavi 1996; Baker 2000; Santoyo 2005; Cordingley 2013), resultan relevantes para abordar el problema de investigación que nos concierne aquí. Más específicamente, a partir de una metodología comparatista e interdisciplinaria, que aúna aportes de los estudios del discurso, la traductología y los estudios literarios, esta investigación busca dar respuesta a la observación de Maingueneau (2014) respecto de la falta de especificidad de los estudios sobre el ethos en el caso del discurso literario explorando la construcción de la imagen del responsable de la enunciación en distintos tipos específicos de discurso literario, en cuyo interior se problematizan, desde distintas ópticas, tanto la noción de ethos (autoral) (Ducrot 1984; Amossy 1999, 2009, 2010, 2012; Maingueneau 1999, 2002, 2013, 2014) como la de ethos del traductor (Suchet 2013; Spoturno 2013).This proposal aims at furthering the scientific and academic tasks already accomplished by the research team while it particularly explores new research problems and questions deriving from the study of ethos, that is, the discursive image attached to the enunciative subject assuming the responsibility for the enunciation of ([self] translated) narrative discourse (Ducrot 1984; Amossy 1999, 2009, 2012). Our plurilingual corpus (English, French, German, Spanish) of texts and translations, written by women, whose production falls within the domain of minority literatures seems adequate to address such a problem. Thus, the construction of ethos will be explored in a set of texts which can be included within the production of so-called ethnic, postcolonial literatures, diasporic writing as much as exile writing and the variations in the genre of self-writing. (Self) translations, largely regarded as minor writing practices (Venuti 1995, 1998; Hermans [1996] 2010; Schiavi 1996; Baker 2000; Santoyo 2005; Cordingley 2013), also become relevant to tackle the research problem at stake here. More specifically, through a comparative and interdisciplinary approach, informed by discourse studies, translation studies and literary studies alike, this proposal intends to answer Maingueneau´s (2014) query regarding the lack of specificity of ethos studies in literary discourse by exploring the construction of ethos in various and specific types of literary discourse, which problematize, from different angles, the notion of Author?s ethos (Ducrot 1984; Amossy 1999, 2009, 2010, 2012; Maingueneau 1999, 2002, 2013, 2014) as much as the Translator?s ethos (Suchet 2013; Spoturno 2013).Fil: Spoturno, María Laura. Universidad Nacional de La Plata. Facultad de Humanidades y Ciencias de la Educación. Instituto de Investigaciones en Humanidades y Ciencias Sociales (UNLP-CONICET); Argentina
Escrituras de minorías, ethos y (auto) traducción
No full textEl presente proyecto se propone afianzar y profundizar las tareas científicas y académicas ya realizadas por el equipo de investigación pero explora también nuevos problemas e interrogantes, que se desprenden del examen del ethos -la imagen discursiva que se asocia al responsable de la enunciación en el discurso narrativo ([auto] traducido) (Ducrot1984; Amossy 1999, 2009, 2012)- en relación con un corpus de textos plurilingüe (alemán, francés, español, inglés), escritos por mujeres, cuya obra se inscribe, en sentido amplio, en el ámbito de las escrituras de minorías. De este modo,se explora la configuración del ethos en un corpus que incluye textos que pueden incluirse dentro de la producción de distintos grupos de minorías étnicas, del mundo poscolonial y de la diáspora así como también en el ámbito de las escrituras del exilio y de las escrituras del yo. Las (auto) traducciones, también consideradas prácticas de escritura menor (Venuti 1995, 1998; Hermans [1996] 2010; Schiavi 1996; Baker 2000; Santoyo 2005; Cordingley 2013), resultan relevantes para abordar el problema de investigación que nos concierne aquí. Más específicamente, a partir de una metodología comparatista e interdisciplinaria, que aúna aportes de los estudios del discurso, la traductología y los estudios literarios, esta investigación busca dar respuesta a la observación de Maingueneau (2014) respecto de la falta de especificidad de los estudios sobre el ethos en el caso del discurso literario explorando la construcción de la imagen del responsable de la enunciación en distintos tipos específicos de discurso literario, en cuyo interior se problematizan, desde distintas ópticas, tanto la noción de ethos (autoral) (Ducrot 1984; Amossy 1999, 2009, 2010, 2012; Maingueneau 1999, 2002, 2013, 2014) como la de ethos del traductor (Suchet 2013; Spoturno 2013).This proposal aims at furthering the scientific and academic tasks already accomplished by the research team while it particularly explores new research problems and questions deriving from the study of ethos, that is, the discursive image attached to the enunciative subject assuming the responsibility for the enunciation of ([self] translated) narrative discourse (Ducrot 1984; Amossy 1999, 2009, 2012). Our plurilingual corpus (English, French, German, Spanish) of texts and translations, written by women, whose production falls within the domain of minority literatures seems adequate to address such a problem. Thus, the construction of ethos will be explored in a set of texts which can be included within the production of so-called ethnic, postcolonial literatures, diasporic writing as much as exile writing and the variations in the genre of self-writing. (Self) translations, largely regarded as minor writing practices (Venuti 1995, 1998; Hermans [1996] 2010; Schiavi 1996; Baker 2000; Santoyo 2005; Cordingley 2013), also become relevant to tackle the research problem at stake here. More specifically, through a comparative and interdisciplinary approach, informed by discourse studies, translation studies and literary studies alike, this proposal intends to answer Maingueneau´s (2014) query regarding the lack of specificity of ethos studies in literary discourse by exploring the construction of ethos in various and specific types of literary discourse, which problematize, from different angles, the notion of Author?s ethos (Ducrot 1984; Amossy 1999, 2009, 2010, 2012; Maingueneau 1999, 2002, 2013, 2014) as much as the Translator?s ethos (Suchet 2013; Spoturno 2013).Fil: Spoturno, María Laura. Universidad Nacional de La Plata. Facultad de Humanidades y Ciencias de la Educación. Instituto de Investigaciones en Humanidades y Ciencias Sociales (UNLP-CONICET); Argentina
Expression of advanced glycation end products and their receptor in skin from patients with systemic sclerosis with and without calcinosis
No full textObjectives. Our aim was to establish which tissue components express advanced glycation/lipoperoxidation end products (AGEs) and their receptor (RAGE) in skin from patients with SSc, and how their expression relates to the disease subtypes and various clinical parameters. Methods. Skin punch biopsies were taken from the forearms of 61 SSc patients with lcSSc; 32 with calcinosis (lcSScCal) and 29 without lcSSc, 36 with the dcSSc subtype and 22 healthy control subjects. Immunohistochemical localization of AGE-CML [Nε-(carboxymethyl) lysine] and RAGE was assessed semi-quantitatively on the microvascular endothelium, dermal fibroblasts and the cutaneous extracellular matrix (ECM). The Kruskal-Wallis one-way ANOVA was used to compare data between groups. Results. AGE-CML expression on the papillary dermis ECM of lcSScCal was greater than in the control group (P=0.016). The reticular dermis of lcSScCal showed increased AGE-Nε-(carboxymethyl) lysine (CML) expression compared with controls (P=0.002), dcSSc (P=0.024) and lcSSc (P=0.025). Increased immunostaining for RAGE was seen on the reticular dermis ECM of the lcSScCal group compared with controls (P=0.007). The lcSScCal subgroup showed statistically significant correlations for AGE-CML, and to a lesser extent for RAGE, with increased RP duration. There was no consistent evidence that the expression of AGE-CML or RAGE related to autoantibody status, clinical or histological skin score or patient age. Conclusions. Our results indicate the possible contribution of AGE-CML deposition on the ECM in the dermis of the lcSScCal subgroup to the pathogenesis of formation of calcinotic deposits. © The Author 2009. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Society for Rheumatology. All rights reserved
Volunteers and mega sporting events : developing a research framework
No full textInterest in all aspects of the politics, financing, planning, management and operation of mega sporting events has been highlighted both by success stories and ongoing problems associated with Olympic Games, Football World Cups and other similar events. There is a growing literature that addresses these and related matters through both case history and comparative analyses. Within the context of mega sporting events, the issue of employment creation is an important motivator for host cities and features high on the political justification agenda for bids to host events. At the same time, the most significant working contribution to major mega events in sports, as in other areas, is provided by the very large numbers of volunteers who undertake tasks across the range of opportunities afforded by such events. Numbers of volunteers between 40,000 and 60,000 have been noted for some recent major events. Relatively little is known about these volunteers at mega sporting events and yet their contribution and wider impact is very significant, both to the events themselves and within the host community. This paper seeks to identify the evident gaps that exist in understanding areas such as what volunteers do at mega sporting events; who they are; what motivates them; how volunteering impacts upon their lives; what associated activities they do surrounding the event in the host city; and the extent to which volunteering is recidivistic. The paper concludes with the presentation of a tentative research framework agenda in order to guide future study of this important area
Where Honors Education and Faculty Development Meet
No full textDevelopment is a contradictory terrain, as seen in the persistence of multiple and conflicting goals, uneven and unequal outcomes, and varied definitions and approaches to teaching and learning in higher education. How might universities support faculty development as a process rather than as isolated educational events? This collection highlights inherent complexities and challenges in sustained professional development and presents new ways of supporting faculty and designing curricula to encourage learning-centered teaching, experiential learning, collaborative undergraduate research, progressive forms of assessment, and other dynamic, inspiring forms of instruction. Engaging in interdisciplinary thinking ranging from Education and Education Policy, Biochemistry, Philosophy, Environmental Humanities, Mathematics, and Religious Studies to Geography and Organizational Leadership, this compilation contributes to the burgeoning growth of global conversations about the need for purposeful, strategic collaborations among the professoriate, centers for teaching and learning, and other vital partners (students, community, government) in education. Authors critically reevaluate the challenges, opportunities, and ambiguities associated with professional development today. Each chapter offers its own exploration (theoretical and/or practical) of the multifaceted nature of faculty development, the challenges faced by educators and administrators, and the potential for transformative partnerships and interventions to improve teaching and to affirm, support, and sustain the joy of learning for students and faculty alike.
CONTENTS
Foreword, Victoria Mundy Bhavsar and Suketu P. Bhavsar
Introduction, John Zubizarreta and Victoria M. Bryan
Part I: Best-Practice Honors Pedagogy and Collaboration for Faculty Development
Team Teaching as Honors Faculty Professional Development, Richard Badenhausen
Leadership Academy: Fostering Honors Faculty Growth through Peer-to-Peer Learning, Chelsea Redger-Marquardt, Doug Stucky, Cindi Mason, Bobby Berry, Samantha Gregus, and Kimberly Engber
Part II: Building Faculty Community
A Critical Role for an Honors Community of Practice, Rebecca C. Bott-Knutson, Scott O’Leary, Scott Breuninger, Karen D. Youmans, Jeff Chamberlain, and Sheila Nowinski
An Edifying Honors Collaborative, Rebecca C. Bott-Knutson, Jonathan D. Kotinek, Heidi M. Appel, Joy L. Hart, Paul Knox, Andrea Radasanu, Daniel M. Roberts, Timothy Nichols, Leigh E. Fine, William L. Ziegler, Mary Bryk, Susan Sumner, Rachael Budowle, Kaetlyn Cordingley, Graham E. Bastian, Noah Roerig, Adam Stroud, and Keith Garbutt
Part III: Honors and CTL Partnerships
Empowering Honors Education: A Joint Initiative for Teaching Excellence and Curriculum Enhancement, Alexandra Bitton-Bailey, Ryan Z. Good, Gabriela Hamerlinck, and Melissa L. Johnson
Leadership and Change from Within: An Honors College and CTL Partnership, Connie M. Schroeder and Hilary K. Snow
The Brief Life of a Students-as-Partners Model for Improving General Education, Rick Fisher and Janel Seeley
Transforming Partnerships: Developing a Model for Experiential Learning in Honors, Grace Troupe and Tamy Burnett
Part IV: Honors faculty Certification
Reimagining an Honors Education: Building a Community of 21st-Century Learners, Robyn M. Brighton and Rebecca J. Toole
A Comprehensive Honors College Faculty Certification Model, Magda J. Castineyra, Virginia Fuillerat, and Marianne Maduro
Part V: Honors Fellows, FIGs, SoTL, and FLCs
Honors Civic Foundations Faculty Fellows Program, Lauren E. Davis and Kevin D. Egan
Exploding the Silos: How Honors and CETL Collaboration Can Transform Faculty Development, Christine Larson, Evren Celik-Wiltse, Kevin Sackreiter, and Rebecca C. Bott-Knutson
A Faculty Inquiry Group for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning in Honors, Kevin Sackreiter, Rebecca C. Bott-Knutson, Christine Larson, and Evren Celik-Wiltse
Part VI: Interdisciplinary Honors Faculty Development
Hacking through the Silos: Honors Faculty Development, Joy L. Hart, Rebecca C. Bott-Knutson, Heidi M. Appel, Jonathan D. Kotinek, Paul Knox, Susan Sumner, Noah Roerig, William L. Ziegler, and Leigh E. Fine
From Classrooms to Communities: Integrating the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals into Honors Education, Megan McIlreavy and Pamela L. Martin
Part VII: Practical Honors Faculty Workshops
Professional Development through Teaching in Honors: An Elon University Workshop, Mike Carignan, Lynn R. Huber, Deandra Little, and Tom Mould
Incorporating Faculty Development Workshops at James Madison University, Fawn-Amber Montoya and Felix Wan
