Suchergebnisse

"Gendered and sexualized abuse and other forms of violence are visibly present in the culture of the third millennium. Especially bodies that are gendered as female are – both dead and alive – objects of multiple forms of abuse and violence in the texts and imageries of contemporary culture. Men, on the other hand, are often represented as abusive towards women and as the violent gender or, as targets of other men's violence. Structural violence has also an impact on many areas of everyday life, and it is materialized in, for example discrimination and inequality. Gender and Violence: The Ethics and Politics of Reading scrutinizes gendered violence as a complex phenomenon of contemporary culture. The authors study the ways in which ways representations of violence can be read, viewed and received. They also discuss what kind of politics the violent representations implement and actualize, and how they affect their audience.
Gender and Violence takes a critical stance on the intersections of gender, power, and violence in literature, film, television and the internet. The analysis focuses on, for example, sci-fi, Nordic Noir and North American comedy series, poems, young adult literature (YA) and nationalist blog texts. The book presents both Finnish and international academic discussions, in which researchers in the fields of gender studies, arts and literature, and cultural studies challenge contemporary English abstract 279 understanding of gender, sexuality, power, and violence. Moreover, Gender and Violence provides tools for critical discussions on violence and in-depth scrutiny about its cost on all of us.
Gender and Violence is an anthology of academic research articles. It works well as an academic textbook, but it also provides timely and new knowledge for everyone interested in questions of gender and violence – phenomena that touch upon all of us."

The book explores the discourses of modernism, contemporary art and art history writing as well as their interdisciplinary values and boundaries – and cases that do not fit within these boundaries.The articles explore the meanings of junk and relics, high art, design, and the intimate experience of art and public criticism. The themes explored in the book expand our views on the queer potential of colour, the meaning of detail, and the relationships between visual art and writing.
The fourteen peer-reviewed case studies in the volume offer new insights from the fields of visual cultural studies, art history and gender studies. The articles in the anthology do not rely strictly on disciplinary boundaries but also open themselves up to broader fields of culture.

The topic of the book is the incremental growth of linguistic knowledge from lexical to structural-cum-textual during the so-called later language development. Language mastery does not presuppose any acquaintance with prescriptive grammar but, instead, concerns the core of language which the so-called consensus principle applies to: the most frequent words and structures are mastered with certainty by everybody, but uncertainty increases as less frequent and more variable phenomena are taken into consideration. It is the goal of the study to make explicit the knowledge that is common to school children of different age groups, and to show how it develops both in its core and in its fringe areas. The mastery of less common aspects exhibits considerable statistical variation. The research embodies methodological pluralism insofar as it has been carried out by means both of the corpus method and the experimental method. Here experimental subsumes writing tasks, paper-and-pencil tests, and behavior under experimental conditions. The amount of participants native in Finnish varies from 300–2000. The book has a bipartite structure: mastery of meanings (Part I), and mastery of forms (Part II).

This book is the first Finnish-language collection of research on superdiversity. At the core of the book is the growing migration to Finland since the turn of the 1990s and its numerous effects on Finnish society. The interdisciplinary examination of superdiversity is important at the current moment: Finland as a society has reached the point where certain social categories, such as ethnic background, country of birth, mother tongue or gender, are not necessarily sufficient to understand the increased diversity and its consequences.
The book consists of a comprehensive introduction to the topic and thirteen chapters. In Finland, research on superdiversity is carried out especially in critical sociolinguistics and applied language studies, education, cultural studies, social sciences, and urban studies. Therefore, these disciplines are strongly represented in the collection, and the chapters approach a variety of topics including refugees' mental health, experiences of multilingual families, the diversity of education and working life, discursive practices in social media, issues of urban planning and pro-asylum activism.

ParlaMint is a multilingual set of comparable corpora containing parliamentary debates mostly starting in 2015 and extending to mid-2020, with each corpus being about 20 million words in size. The sessions in the corpora are marked as belonging to the COVID-19 period (after October 2019), or being "reference" (before that date). The corpora have extensive metadata, including aspects of the parliament; the speakers (name, gender, MP status, party affiliation, party coalition/opposition); are structured into time-stamped terms, sessions and meetings; with speeches being marked by the speaker and their role (e.g. chair, regular speaker). The speeches also contain marked-up transcriber comments, such as gaps in the transcription, interruptions, applause, etc. Note that some corpora have further information, e.g. the year of birth of the speakers, links to their Wikipedia articles, their membership in various committees, etc. The corpora are encoded according to the Parla-CLARIN TEI recommendation (https://clarin-eric.github.io/parla-clarin/), but have been validated against the compatible, but much stricter ParlaMint schemas. This entry contains the ParlaMint TEI-encoded corpora with the derived plain text version of the corpus along with TSV metadata on the speeches. Also included is the 2.0 release of the data and scripts available at the GitHub repository of the ParlaMint project. Note that there also exists the linguistically marked-up version of the corpus, which is available at http://hdl.handle.net/11356/1405.

ParlaMint 2.1 is a multilingual set of 17 comparable corpora containing parliamentary debates mostly starting in 2015 and extending to mid-2020, with each corpus being about 20 million words in size. The sessions in the corpora are marked as belonging to the COVID-19 period (after November 1st 2019), or being "reference" (before that date). The corpora have extensive metadata, including aspects of the parliament; the speakers (name, gender, MP status, party affiliation, party coalition/opposition); are structured into time-stamped terms, sessions and meetings; with speeches being marked by the speaker and their role (e.g. chair, regular speaker). The speeches also contain marked-up transcriber comments, such as gaps in the transcription, interruptions, applause, etc. Note that some corpora have further information, e.g. the year of birth of the speakers, links to their Wikipedia articles, their membership in various committees, etc. The corpora are encoded according to the Parla-CLARIN TEI recommendation (https://clarin-eric.github.io/parla-clarin/), but have been validated against the compatible, but much stricter ParlaMint schemas. This entry contains the ParlaMint TEI-encoded corpora with the derived plain text version of the corpus along with TSV metadata on the speeches. Also included is the 2.0 release of the data and scripts available at the GitHub repository of the ParlaMint project. Note that there also exists the linguistically marked-up version of the corpus, which is available at http://hdl.handle.net/11356/1431.

ParlaMint is a multilingual set of comparable corpora containing parliamentary debates mostly starting in 2015 and extending to mid-2020, with each corpus being about 20 million words in size. The sessions in the corpora are marked as belonging to the COVID-19 period (after October 2019), or being "reference" (before that date). The corpora have extensive metadata, including aspects of the parliament; the speakers (name, gender, MP status, party affiliation, party coalition/opposition); are structured into time-stamped terms, sessions and meetings; with speeches being marked by the speaker and their role (e.g. chair, regular speaker). The speeches also contain marked-up transcriber comments, such as gaps in the transcription, interruptions, applause, etc. Note that some corpora have further information, e.g. the year of birth of the speakers, links to their Wikipedia articles, their membership in various committees, etc. The corpora are encoded according to the Parla-CLARIN TEI recommendation (https://clarin-eric.github.io/parla-clarin/), but have been validated against the compatible, but much stricter ParlaMint schemas. This entry contains the linguistically marked-up version of the corpus, while the text version is available at http://hdl.handle.net/11356/1388. The ParlaMint.ana linguistic annotation includes tokenization, sentence segmentation, lemmatisation, Universal Dependencies part-of-speech, morphological features, and syntactic dependencies, and the 4-class CoNLL-2003 named entities. Some corpora also have further linguistic annotations, such as PoS tagging or named entities according to language-specific schemes, with their corpus TEI headers giving further details on the annotation vocabularies and tools. The compressed files include the ParlaMint.ana XML TEI-encoded linguistically annotated corpus; the derived corpus in CoNLL-U with TSV speech metadata; and the vertical files (with registry file), suitable for use with CQP-based concordancers, such as CWB, noSketch Engine or KonText. Also included is the 2.0 release of the data and scripts available at the GitHub repository of the ParlaMint project.

ParlaMint 2.1 is a multilingual set of 17 comparable corpora containing parliamentary debates mostly starting in 2015 and extending to mid-2020, with each corpus being about 20 million words in size. The sessions in the corpora are marked as belonging to the COVID-19 period (from November 1st 2019), or being "reference" (before that date). The corpora have extensive metadata, including aspects of the parliament; the speakers (name, gender, MP status, party affiliation, party coalition/opposition); are structured into time-stamped terms, sessions and meetings; with speeches being marked by the speaker and their role (e.g. chair, regular speaker). The speeches also contain marked-up transcriber comments, such as gaps in the transcription, interruptions, applause, etc. Note that some corpora have further information, e.g. the year of birth of the speakers, links to their Wikipedia articles, their membership in various committees, etc. The corpora are encoded according to the Parla-CLARIN TEI recommendation (https://clarin-eric.github.io/parla-clarin/), but have been validated against the compatible, but much stricter ParlaMint schemas. This entry contains the linguistically marked-up version of the corpus, while the text version is available at http://hdl.handle.net/11356/1432. The ParlaMint.ana linguistic annotation includes tokenization, sentence segmentation, lemmatisation, Universal Dependencies part-of-speech, morphological features, and syntactic dependencies, and the 4-class CoNLL-2003 named entities. Some corpora also have further linguistic annotations, such as PoS tagging or named entities according to language-specific schemes, with their corpus TEI headers giving further details on the annotation vocabularies and tools. The compressed files include the ParlaMint.ana XML TEI-encoded linguistically annotated corpus; the derived corpus in CoNLL-U with TSV speech metadata; and the vertical files (with registry file), suitable for use with CQP-based concordancers, such as CWB, noSketch Engine or KonText. Also included is the 2.1 release of the data and scripts available at the GitHub repository of the ParlaMint project. As opposed to the previous version 2.0, this version corrects some errors in various corpora and adds the information on upper / lower house for bicameral parliaments. The vertical files have also been changed to make them easier to use in the concordancers.

It is generally recognized that in early modern society, the position of the church and clergy was very central. As many historians have stated over the decades, the church and state were closely connected and their power structures and ideologies supported each other. However, when studying the social and public role of the church and clergy, it soon becomes quite clear how pervasive this phenomenon was. The church not only created but also maintained and acted as a part of international, national, and local communities, structures, and cultures that connected people regardless of their social status and gender. The church was a spiritual, administrative, and social institution and experience environment, whose tasks, scope, and meanings changed and intertwined with the development, needs, and requirements of society. In this book, we investigate from different perspectives the motives and different means by which the church and clergy came to play a significant part in early modern society. In this volume, the church is considered both as an administrative institution and as a social space and cultural structure. Hence, we do not focus on the history of theology or doctrinal questions. Instead, we consider the social and public roles and meanings of the church. The church as such is understood in this book as transnational, a strong national and local institution, and also a space and structure. The church had its own institutionalized place in society and its activities and rights were defined by law (Church law 1696, the Law of the Swedish kingdom 1734) and by the decrees given by the Royal Majesty. The church had its own archbishop-led administrative organization under the Royal Majesty and it worked in close cooperation with the Crown administration and county governors. In this volume, we understand the clergy as church servants, a trained and appointed professional group, a separate estate (social class), and also as a wide social network constructed by their families. The approach of this book is social science history. In other words, the book examines the church and the clergy as an integral part of society and the individual communities who lived in the current Finnish territory during the early modern era. The topic is examined on the basis of three conceptual themes reflecting important new areas of research in the study of the social significance of the church and clergy: (1) the clergy and family as part of the community, (2) the church as a jointly built space, and (3) the church as an arena for interaction, knowledge, and politics. We approach this multidimensionality using different research questions, sources, methods, and theoretical approaches. The volume focuses on the 17th to 19th centuries, but many of the church and clergy-related phenomena are much older, and some of them extend to the present, so the articles also move beyond this time frame.

Tutkimuksessa selvitetään, missä määrin työpaikkojen työsuojeluvalvontaa toteutetaan alueellisesti eri tavalla eli toteutuuko valvonta työpaikoilla yhtenäisesti eri puolilla Suomea. Tutkimuksen ennakko-oletuksena on, että merkittävä syy työsuojeluvalvonnan alueelliseen erilaisuuteen on valvonnan organisointi viiden itsenäisen aluehallintoviraston työsuojelun vastuualueen tehtäväksi. Työsuojeluhallintoa ja työsuojeluvalvonnan toteutumisen yhtenäisyyttä työpaikoilla ei ole tutkittu tieteellisesti 2000-luvulla. Tämä tutkimus arvioi työsuojeluhallinnon rakennetta ja valvonnan toteutumista sekä hallinnon että työpaikkojen näkökulmasta. Tutkimus antaa sekä tieteellisesti perusteltuja teoreettisia että hallinnon asiakkaiden näkökulmia työsuojeluhallinnossa käynnissä olevaan valvonnan yhtenäistämiskehitykseen. Tutkimuksen teoreettisena viitekehyksenä on hallinnon evaluaatiotutkimus, joka tarkoittaa hallinnon toimivuuden arviointia käyttäjä- ja asiakasnäkökulmasta. Työsuojeluhallinto toteuttaa työpaikoille kohdistuvaa työsuojeluvalvontaa työsuojelutarkastuksina, jolloin hallinnon asiakkaita ovat työpaikat ja niiden työnantajat ja työntekijät. Pääasiallisena tutkimusaineistona ovat valvontatietojärjestelmä Veran raportit ja niistä tehdyt 27 valvonnan alueellista vertailua sekä henkilöhaastattelut, jotka kohdistuvat 52:een työsuojeluhallinnon, työmarkkinajärjestöjen ja työpaikkojen työsuojeluhenkilöön. Tutkimuksessa on kolme päälukua: työsuojeluhallituksen aika 1973-1993, itsenäisten alueellisten työsuojeluviranomaisten aika vuodesta 1993 lähtien sisältäen työmarkkinajärjestöjen roolin työsuojeluvalvonnassa ja valvonnan alueellinen vertailu. Tutkimusmatkani kohti yhtenäistä työpaikkojen työsuojeluvalvontaa alkoi työsuojeluhallituksesta, joka perustettiin vuonna 1973 osana hyvinvointivaltion rakentamista ja valtiojohtoista suunnitteluoptimismia. Valtiollinen työsuojelu koottiin yhden ministeriön alaisuuteen. Työsuojeluhallituksen aikana oli keskusjohtoinen, ainakin osittain yhtenäinen työsuojeluvalvonta, mutta keskusviraston toiminta ei onnistunut, koska työnantajat vastustivat sitä koko ajan pitäen sen toimintaa konspiratiivisena, vehkeilevänä. Työsuojeluhallitus lakkautettiin vuonna 1993 osana keskusvirastojärjestelmän purkamista 1990-luvun alun taloudellisen laman seurauksena. Valtion harjoittamaa sääntelyä purettiin hallinnon kaikilla sektoreilla, ja hallintoa madallettiin lähemmäksi asiakasta. Valtion merkitystä vähennettiin koko yhteiskunnassa ja hyvinvointivaltiosta tehtiin kilpailuvaltio, jolloin markkinaliberalismi ja New Public Management voimistuivat. Työsuojeluhallituksen lakkautuksessa tehtiin ehkä muutakin politiikkaa; pirstaloimalla valvovaa hallintoa heikennettiin samalla työpaikoille kohdistuvaa keskitettyä valvonnan voimaa. Itsenäisten alueellisten työsuojeluviranomaisten aikana vuodesta 1993 lähtien entisten työsuojelupiirien ja nykyisten aluehallintoviraston työsuojelun vastuualueiden toiminnallinen itsenäisyys korostui. Hallinnon toiminnassa näkyy, ettei työsuojeluvalvonnalla ole yhteistä keskusjohtoa. Sosiaali- ja terveysministeriön työ- ja tasa-arvo-osasto, jonka alaisuuteen työsuojelu keskushallinnossa kuuluu, toteuttaa Kansainvälisen työjärjestön ILO:n (International Labour Organization) sopimusten tulkintaa, että työsuojeluhallinto on riippumaton valvontatehtävää suorittaessaan eikä ministeriö siten puutu valvonnan alueellisiin menettelytapoihin. Tutkimus käsittelee myös työsuojeluhallinnon laajaa yhteistyötä työmarkkinajärjestöjen kanssa. Järjestöt osallistuvat kaikkeen päätöksentekoon, jossa käsitellään hallinnon tavoitteita, painopisteitä, valvontaohjeita ja resursseja. Tutkimuksessa arvioidaan edustuksellisen demokratian näkökulmasta korporatiivisen etujärjestövaikutuksen ja hallinnon suhdetta riippumattoman työsuojeluvalvonnan päätöksenteossa ja toimeenpanossa. Tarkastuskertomuksiin perustuva alueellisen valvonnan vertailu osoittaa, että työsuojeluvalvonta on eriytynyt vastuualueittain. Työpaikkojen kunnossaolo määritellään usein eri tavalla, joten tarkastajien valvoma työturvallisuuden minimitaso ei toteudu yhdenmukaisesti koko maassa. Siten velvoitteita korjata tai poistaa työturvallisuusepäkohtia annetaan eri tavalla ja lopputuloksena on se, ettei työnantajia kohdella tasapuolisesti. Tutkimuksen johtopäätöksenä on, että työsuojeluvalvonta on osa kansallista hallintotoimintaa ja laillisuusvalvontaa, ei alueellista tai paikallista hallintoa. Työsuojelu ei eroa toimialoittain maantieteellisesti, koska eri ammattialojen työ on pääpiirteissään samanlaista koko maassa ja niiden työturvallisuus ei juurikaan eroa maantieteellisesti. Tämän vuoksi myös työsuojeluvalvonnan pitäisi olla yhdenmukaista koko maassa. Suomeen pitäisi perustaa Pohjoismaiden mallin mukainen työsuojelun keskusorganisaatio, joka koordinoisi yhtenäistä laillisuusvalvontaa samalla tavalla kuin Poliisihallitus, Syyttäjälaitos ja uusi Tuomioistuinvirasto koordinoivat toimialojensa laillisuusvalvontaa ja toiminnan menettelytapoja. ; This study examines the extent to which workplace occupational safety and health (OSH) enforcing is carried out differently across the Finnish regions, in other words whether workplace enforcing is uniform across Finland. The presupposition of the study is that an important reason for the regional disparity in labour inspection is the decentralized organization of the inspection to by the five independent divisions of occupational health and safety of the regional state administrative agency. The OSH administration and the uniformity of the implementation of OSH in the workplace have not been scientifically studied in the 21st century. This study assesses the structure and implementation of the OSH administration from the perspective of both the administration and the workplace. The study provides a scientifically justified analysis covering both theoretical and customers' perspectives on OSH management and the ongoing integration of health and safety enforcement. The chosen theoretical approach of the study is the administrative evaluation framework, which means assessing the functionality of administration from the user and customer perspective. The Labour Inspectorate carries out workplace safety inspections in the form of occupational safety inspections, whereby the customers of the administration are the workplaces and their employers and employees. The main research material are OSH inspection database Vera reports and personal interviews carried out with 52 persons in the job protection administration, labour organizations and employment OSH personnel. The study consists of three main empirical chapters: the Labour Protection Board, the Central Office 1973-1993, the independent Regional Labour Inspectorate since 1993, including the role of labour organizations in labour inspection and the regional comparison of labour inspection. Shift towards an integrated job labour inspection started with the Labour Protection Board which was established in 1973 as part of the construction of the welfare state during the era of optimism in state-directed planning State labour protection was brought together under one ministry. The Labour Protection Board the system was center-led, at least regarding uniform occupational health and safety enforcing, but the Board's operations were not successful, mainly because the employers were opposed to it throughout its existence. The Labour Protection Board was abolished in 1993 as part of the dismantling of the central office system that followed the economic recession in the early 1990s. State regulation in all sectors of government was decentralized and administration was brought closer to the customers. The role of the state was diminished in society as a whole and the welfare state became a competitive state, with neoliberalism and New Public Management becoming stronger. Other objectives were also part of the decision to abolish the Labour Protection Board; at the same time, the fragmentation of supervisory authorities weakened the efficiency of workplace control. The era of the independent regional labour inspectorates since 1993 underlines the functional independence of the former OSH Inspectorate and the current division of occupational health and safety of the regional state administrative agency. The operation shows that there is no common central management for labour enforcement. The Department for Work and Gender Equality of the Social and Health Ministry, which is responsible for occupational safety in central administration, interprets International Labour Organization (ILO) conventions as meaning that the labour administration is independent in carrying out its supervisory function. Thus, the Ministry does not interfere with regional control procedures. The study also deals with the extensive co-operation between the labour protection administration and the labour market organizations. Trade unions are involved in all decision-making concerning management objectives, priorities, control guidelines and resources. The study examines the influence of corporatist interest groups and the governance of occupational health and safety enforcing decision-making and implementation from the perspective of representative democracy. A comparison of regional control based on inspection reports shows that OSH control of occupational health and safety has varied between the regional divisions. The condition of workplaces is often defined differently, so the minimum level of occupational safety supervised by inspectors is not uniformly applied throughout the country. Thus, obligations to remedy or eliminate occupational safety deficiencies in workplaces are given different treatment and the result is that employees are not treated equally. The conclusion of the study is that health and safety control should be in the competence of national administration and judicial review, not regional or local administration. Occupational safety and health does not differ geographically by industry, as the work of the various occupations is broadly similar throughout the country and there is little geographical variation in occupational safety. For this reason, labour inspection should also be uniform throughout the country. Finland should set up the Nordic model of a more centralized OSH system, which would coordinate an integrated review of legality in the same way as the National Police Board, the Prosecutor's Office and the Court of Justice co- ordinate the law enforcement and operational procedures of their respective sectors.