123,120 research outputs found
World War I record of service survey for Charles R. Williams, signed 15 March 1926
No full textQuestionnaire about Charles Robert Williams' service in World War I, 1917-1919, signed by Williams on 15 March 1926.Questionnaire originally part of a survey of Norwich University alumni. Data from these questionnaires was used in a chapter of "Vermont in the world war, 1917-1919" by Harold P. Sheldon (1928). Transcription by Carina Berg. Transcriptions may be subject to error
World War I record of service survey for Seth Williams, signed 12 March 1926
No full textQuestionnaire about Seth Williams' service in World War I, 1917-1919, signed by Williams on 12 March 1926.Questionnaire originally part of a survey of Norwich University alumni conducted by a “Norwich in the World War” committee consisting of Charles N. Barber (chairman), Carl V. Woodbury, K.R.B. Flint, and Gustaf A. Nelson. Data from these questionnaires may have been used in a chapter of "Vermont in the world war, 1917-1919" by Harold P. Sheldon (1928). Transcription by Carina Berg. Transcriptions may be subject to error
Raymond Williams and the limits of cultural materialism
Get PDFCultural materialism has become an influential discipline in recent
years, particularly so in 'Renaissance' studies, but also more generally in
'English', as well as departments defined as practising 'cultural' or
'communications' studies. The phrase is usually linked with the name of
Raymond Williams, but a cursory examination of Williams's own work
quickly establishes that it is a phrase he rarely uses, and only schematically
attempts to define. The thesis therefore takes the form of an investigation into
the way cultural materialism has come to be understood, by examining in
detail the trajectory of Raymond Williams's theoretical development, and how
his own engagement with various theoretical positions has helped to set
'limits' on the meaning of cultural materialism.
Chapters 1 and 2 deal with some of Williams's earliest work,
particularly Reading and Criticism, as a way of investigating how reasonable
it is to tag him as a 'Left-Leavisite', arguing that Leavis's undoubted
influence is resisted (though not entirely rejected) from a very early stage. The
first chapter considers in detail Leavis's work at Cambridge, the influence of
Eliot, and the significance of the 'Organic Community'. Chapter 2, which is
based around a comparative analysis of Williams's and Leavis's readings of
Dickens, argues that Williams rejects the 'organic community' in favour of his
'knowable community'. Chapters 4 and 5 deal with specific 'theoretical'
issues: the first, based around a reading of Terry Eagleton's critique of
Williams's use of the Marxist metaphor of 'base and superstructure', shows
some of the problems which arise from Williams's cultural model, as well as
suggesting refinements; the second deals with the influence of Volosinov's
theories on Williams. Chapter 6 comes out of Williams's readings of the
'Country-House' poems in The Country and the City, showing how his
practice of literary criticism relies on an acceptance of 'ideology' apparently
denied in his more 'theoretical' writings. This analysis is extended as a result
of investigations into the 'De L'Isle' manuscripts relating to the Penshurst
estate. Chapter 7 argues that it is possible to see the work of Fredric Jameson
as developing Williams's cultural materialism into Jameson's debates on
postmodernism.
In the Introduction and Conclusion, I have taken the opportunity to
look briefly at the activity of cultural materialism as it has developed since
Raymond Williams's death in 1988. The Introduction emphasizes what I see
to be important methodological differences between 'cultural materialism'
and 'new historicism'; the Conclusion deals with the continuing debate over
the value of a cultural materialist approach by considering the 'appropriation'
of Shakespeare
Williams Album 0 : p. 62
No full textNewspaper clippings on various topics (1911, 1935-1937). Page is hand numbered '62'. -- 1935 - Keweenaw Barn Dance Troop at Rex theater in Ahmeek. Individuals mentioned Emil Goodreau, Vladimir Floriani, Lado Floriani, Fritz Giessler, Veko Floriani, John Polanich, Joseph Floriani, William Lammi, Peter Lassila, Woodbridge Bensom, Russell Yowell, F. Chopp, Buddy Diring, Wesley Williams, Thomas Curtis, Maxine Wills, Clarice Cronenworth, Ruth Simula, Margaret Diring, Gertrude Leskinen, Mary Varius, Eva Brisky, Lorraine Malmquist. -- 1936- Poem 'The Mountain Drive' by H. L., about Brockway Mountain Drive. -- July, 1935 -Johnston Post, American Legion of Keweenaw wil entertain, booths to be established at Keweenaw Golf Course for Michigan Tech reunion. Individuals mentioned William A. Rowe, Peter Schlegelmann, Joseph Enriette, Wilfred Dunn, R. M. Dodge, Paul Pintar, Thomas W. Hebbard, Wesley Williams. -- 1937 - Fred Sollman of canal Coast Guard announced opening of winter stations at Jacobsville and Traverse River, for protection of ice fishermen. Individuals Henry Padberg, of Eagle Harbor, Odger R. Anderson. -- June, 1936 - Keweenaw County Tourist Information booth, at U. S 41 and Cliff View to open. Log constructionin charge of NYA workers. Arthur Hagman of Gay Industries, Inc. involved. -- 1935 - Lake shore drive between Eagle Harbor and Copper Harbor to be completed under direction of Frank Galarno. I. L. Whitehead company has contract. Mentioned Judge William E. Smith, Roger T. Vaughn. -- 1935 - Keweenaw Barn Dance Troop wil appear at America Legion hall and at Rex theater in Ahmeek. -- 1936 - Johnston Post, American Legion of Keweenaw holds meeting at Mohawk, will visit Lakeview Cemetery, and Eagle River Cemetery, and Mohawk M. E. Church. Individuals mentioned Thomas W. Hebbard, G. F. Brewington, William E. Smith, Rev. E. W. Tink, Ahmeek male quartet which is Williams, Burrows, Snell and Kestle, Leonard Bartanen. -- 1911 - Officers of Glaciadom company elected, W. J. smith, A. R. Tucker. T. H. Berryman. -- 1911 - Hockey fans to meet, organize Mohawk team with Hogan, Cross, Williams, Treglown, Wills, Brewer, and Uksils
Ryukyua Williams & Bunkley-Williams 1994
No full textGenus <i>Ryukyua</i> Williams & Bunkley-Williams, 1994 <p> <i>Ryukyua</i> Williams & Bunkley-Williams, 1994: 155–161.— Vigneshwaran, Ravichandran & Martin, 2018d: 199.</p> <p> <i>Livoneca</i> — Pillai, 1954: 17; 1964: 218–220 [partim].</p> <p> <b>Type species</b>. <i>Ryukyua globosa</i> Williams & Bunkley-Williams, 1994, by holotype.</p> <p> <b>Diagnosis.</b> A detailed diagnosis was given by Williams & Bunkley-Williams (1994) and Vigneshwaran <i>et al.</i> (2018d).</p> <p> <b>Remarks.</b> Williams & Bunkley-Williams (1994) provided the provisional diagnosis of the genus <i>Ryukyua</i>. <i>Ryukyua</i> can be identified by the strongly hunched and spherical body; mandibular palp all distinct article 3 short; coxae partially visible dorsally; uropods small relative to body size, rami elongate-oval, subequal in length.</p> <p> <i>Ryukyua</i> shares several characters with <i>Cterissa</i> Schiöedte & Meinert, 1884. Both genera are similar with regard to their cephalon and pereon morphology, cephalon small deeply immersed into pereonite 1, posterior margin not trilobed; pereonite 1 short, lateral margins convex, wider than two thirds the length of pereonite 2; pereonites 6 and 7 decreasing in width and length posteriorly, widest at pereonites 4 and 5; pereonite 7 posterior margin deeply concave, lateral margin produced posteriorly and overlapping lateral margin of pleonites 3–5. <i>Ryukyua</i> can be distinguished from <i>Cterissa</i> in having symmetrical body coxae 2–3 narrow with posteroventral angles rounded; coxae 4–7 acute, partially visible in dorsal view (<i>vs</i> coxae of pereonites all wide rounded and visible in dorsal view in <i>Cterissa</i>) and pleonites 1–3 lateral margins which are not bilobed. The genus <i>Ryukyua</i> distinguished from other known cymothoid genera by hunched and spherical body.</p>Published as part of <i>Ravichandran, S., Vigneshwaran, P. & Rameshkumar, G., 2019, A taxonomic review of the fish parasitic isopod family Cymothoidae Leach, 1818 (Crustacea: Isopoda: Cymothooidea) of India, pp. 1-99 in Zootaxa 4622 (1)</i> on page 73, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4622.1.1, <a href="http://zenodo.org/record/3379899">http://zenodo.org/record/3379899</a>
Monoportula P. A. Sims & D. M. Williams, nov. gen.
No full text<i>Monoportula</i> P.A.Sims & D.M.Williams nov. gen. <p> <b>Registration</b>: http://phycobank.org/103661</p> <p> Type species:— <i>Monoportula uralensis</i> (Strelnikova) P.A.Sims & D.M.Williams nov. comb.</p> <p>Frustules cylindrical, valve face circular, flat. Valve face bordered by expanded marginal ridge separating it from vertical mantle. Areolae poroid, on valve face arranged in interrupted radial and sub-radial rows extending from off-centre hyaline area from which a stout spine extends. Scattered spinules cover valve face disturbing areolar arrangement. Mantle areolae in vertical rows situated between hyaline marginal ridge and hyaline valve margin. Mantle areolae covered by network of anastomosing costae. Internally areolae sunk in rows between hyaline ribs, areolae becoming more numerous towards valve margin. One (1) rimoportula present, its external opening through stout tube expanded at its summit, internally as slit between raised lips.</p>Published as part of <i>Williams, David M., Sims, Pat A. & Witkowski, Jakub, 2023, Notes on the rare Cretaceous species Syndetocystis uralensis Strelnikova leading to the description of a new monotypic genus Monoportula P. A. Sims et D. M. Williams nov. gen., pp. 219-224 in Phytotaxa 595 (2)</i> on page 220, DOI: 10.11646/phytotaxa.595.2.8, <a href="http://zenodo.org/record/7905940">http://zenodo.org/record/7905940</a>
Issues in front-end decision-making on projects
No full textThe importance of the front-end decision-making phase in projects is being increasingly recognized - the need to do the right project is on a par with doing the project right. This area is underrepresented in the literature, but there are a number of key themes that run throughout, identifying key issues or difficulties during this stage. This article looks at some of these themes and includes: the need for alignment between organizational strategy and the project concept; dealing with complexity, in particular the systemicity and interrelatedness within project decisions; consideration of the ambiguity implicit in all major projects; taking into account psychological and political biases within estimation of benefits and costs; consideration of the social geography and politics within decision-making groups; and preparation for the turbulence within the project environment, including the maintenance of strategic alignment
Glossobius hemiramphi Williams & Williams 1985
No full text<i>Glossobius hemiramphi</i> Williams & Williams, 1985 <p> <i>Glossobius hemiramphi</i> Williams & Williams, 1985: 147, figs 1–25.— Bruce & Bowman, 1989: 19, figs 13, 14.— Bakenhaster, McBride & Price, 2006: 283, fig. 5.— Martin, Bruce & Nowak, 2015b: 345–346. Aneesh, Helna, Sudha, & Anilkumar, 2017a: 3–17, figs 7–14.</p> <p> <b>Type and type locality.</b> The holotype (USNM 213532), allotype (USNM 213533) and paratypes (USNM 213534– 213541) were collected offshore Guanica Bay, Puerto Rico from host ballyhoo <i>Hemiramphus brasiliensis</i> (Linnaeus, 1758) and are deposited at The National Museum of Natural History, Smithsonian Institution, Washington.</p> <p> <b>Remarks.</b> <i>Glossobius hemiramphi</i> is identified by the subparallel body shape; rostrum subacute, antennula and antenna stout, lack of bulbous lobe on pereonite 1, pleotelson posterior margin emarginate and broad carinae on pereopod 7 basis.</p> <p> <i>Glossobius hemiramphi</i> is most similar with <i>G. anctus</i> and <i>Glossobius parexocoetii</i> Kononenko & Mordvinova, 1988 in having a subparallel body shape, antennula and antenna stout, and similar uropod morphology. <i>Glossobius hemiramphi</i> differs from <i>G. anctus</i> in having broader anterior margins of coxae, posterior margins of pereonites 1–7 deeply concave, and a rounded rostrum; <i>G. parexocoetii</i> differs from <i>G. hemiramphi</i> in the less prominent lateral lobes on pereonite 1, pereonite 4 subrectangular, pleonites 1–5 with concave posterior margins, antenna with 9 segments (compared to 8 segments), and pleotelson posterior margin rounded (Kononenko & Mordvinova 1988).</p> <p> <b>Distribution.</b> This species distributed from Western Atlantic to Indian Ocean. Western Atlantic: Georgia, Florida, Bermuda, Bahamas, Haiti, Puerto Rico, Virgin Islands, Yucatan Peninsula, Mexico; Eastern Atlantic: Dakar, Senegal, Angola, Liberia, Sierra Leone, Guinea, Ghana (see Bruce & Bowman 1989) and Indian Ocean: Malabar Coast, India (see Aneesh <i>et al.</i> 2017a).</p> <p> <b>Hosts.</b> Known only from the family Hemiramphidae: <i>Hemiramphus brasiliensis</i> (Linnaeus, 1758) (see Williams & Williams 1985), <i>Hemiramphus bermudaensis</i> Collette, 1962 (see Bruce & Bowman 1989) and <i>Hemiramphus lutkei</i> Valenciennes, 1847 (see Aneesh <i>et al.</i> 2017a).</p>Published as part of <i>Ravichandran, S., Vigneshwaran, P. & Rameshkumar, G., 2019, A taxonomic review of the fish parasitic isopod family Cymothoidae Leach, 1818 (Crustacea: Isopoda: Cymothooidea) of India, pp. 1-99 in Zootaxa 4622 (1)</i> on page 27, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4622.1.1, <a href="http://zenodo.org/record/3379899">http://zenodo.org/record/3379899</a>
- …
