Suchergebnisse

The aim of this paper is to describe the system behind personal names in Hadiyya. The bulk of the paper analyses the semantics of personal names. Hadiyya personal names express social, economic and political circumstances accompanying the birth of a child. Name givers express their wishes, desires and emotions through personal names. The close examination of names over generations indicates a gradual shift from typical Had-iyya names to modified Amharic-based names. Since the advent of Christianity in the region, Biblical names have also become common. The historical underpinnings for the shift to Amharic-based and Biblical names are language and cultural contact. All Hadiyya personal names display vowel endings that mark case and gender. Like other nouns in the language, per-sonal names can have simple, derived or compound form. Interestingly, most Hadiyya personal names can be translated freely with relative or agentive readings. Personal names can have a perfective reading describing past experience or an imperfective reading expressing wishes for the future. Though Hadiyya is a morphologically complex language and hence all the above grammatical notions are overtly marked, they are omitted in the morphology of personal names. The use of inflectional and derivational morphemes is minimal. Hadiyya personal names are therefore special word classes that tend to display a simplified morphosyntactic structure and free translation.

"U.S. Government Printing Office : 1969 O-356-694"--P. 217. ; "Prepared in the Geographic Names Division, U.S. Army Topographic Command, Washington, D.C., 20315, June 1969." ; Originally published in 1947 by the Board on Geographical Names as its Special publication no. 86 under title: The geographical names of Antarctica. ; Mode of access: Internet.

"U.S. Government Printing Office : 1966 O-232-406"--P. 169. ; "Prepared in the Office of Geography, Department of the Interior, Washington, D.C., 20240. August 1966." ; First published in 1947 by the Board on Geographical Names as its Special publication no. 86 under title: The geographical names of Antarctica. ; Mode of access: Internet.

Ein wesentliches Charakteristikum von Intellektuellen ist der Anspruch, Belange anderer stellvertretend zu artikulieren. Die Legitimation von Stellvertretung ist generell hoch voraussetzungsvoll. Dies gilt erst recht für intellektuelle Stellvertretung, die beansprucht, im Namen allgemein gültiger – gar: allgemeinmenschlicher – Prinzipien aufzutreten. Dies hat im Laufe des 20. Jahrhunderts zu Missbrauch und zu Politik über die Köpfe der Vertretenen hinweg und gegen sie geführt. Gegen das daraus resultierenden tiefen (Selbst-)Misstrauen gegenüber Intellektuellen steht freilich die Notwendigkeit der Stellvertretung jener, die überhaupt nicht in der Lage sind, ihre Belange selbst zu artikulieren. Vor diesem Hintergrund wird in dem Beitrag knapp skizziert, dass eine gegenwärtig legitimierbare Aufgabe von Intellektuellen darin bestehen kann, das Recht auf individuelle Besonderheiten als allgemeines Anliegen öffentlich zu vertreten. Intellectuals can be characterized by their claim to representatively express other people's interests. To legitimate representation is highly demanding in general all the more so where intellectuals claim to represent interests in the name of generally applicable principles. In the course of the 20th century this led to abuse and to politics over people's heads and against those represented. The resulting deep (self-) distrust against intellectuals is, however, opposed by the necessity to represent all those who are unable to articulate their interests on their own behalf. Against this background the paper argues that currently a legitimate task of intellectuals can be to publicly represent the right to individual particularities as a general concern.

This contribution starts from observing a remarkable absence of continuity in scholarly debates and discourses, in the field of theater and performance studies. Instead, our 'debate' seems to be hidden in a process of ongoing proliferation, moving in any kind of direction without any sense of orientation, which makes it very hard to identify a specific theatre and performance studies perspective or to identify approaches and methodologies specific to the field - something that is actually quite relevant when interdisciplinary exchange is to be a mutual affair. The problem of this wide variety of approaches is that it renders theatre and performance studies invisible as a specific practice with particular approaches. How are we to be recognized in an interdisciplinary field? By inquiring in the practice and politics of 'naming', and the absence of that, this contribution addresses the current state of affairs in the theatre and performance studies field, followed by the suggestion that we should perhaps give names to our tools and concepts and methodologies, to establish debates in which we enter into discussion and actually respond to each other. This contribution deliberately seeks to move through uneasy terms like 'tradition' or 'branding', to advocate a practice of naming. Drawing on Tim Ingold's analysis of naming practices and activities (rather than classes or categories) and Rosi Braidotti's citationality, this invitation is not a call for 'closing the ranks', instead it is a plea for articulating particularity; an invitation to develop a joint, accumulative practice, in which we continue acting fugitively, but with a plan.

Ein Kommentar zum Protest gegen die Reform des WissZeitVG und darüber hinaus

Duringthe summer of 1993, CBS News aired an hour-long television special program entitled Schwarzkopf in Vietnam: A Soldier Returns. This program, hereafter referred to as SVN:ASR, featured a return trip to Southeast Asia by retired US Army General H. Norman Schwarzkopf and CBS News personality Dan Rather, both of whom served in different capacities in Southeast Asia during the war years. Their current trip to Vietnam was the first time either person had been back to Indochina since the end of the war in April 1975. First and foremost, we must recognize that this particular program is a commodity. SVN:ASR was broadcast on network television, which like any other commercial enterprise exists to make a profit. Viewing this artifact at face value, the program appeared to be strictly informative -- a televised lesson in American military history given by a well-known military figure. One could reasonably surmise that the network.

This work discusses Slovenian geographical names: endonyms in Slovenia and in border areas inhabited by Slovenians in neighboring countries, and Slovenian exonyms used in Slovenian to describe geographical features outside the Slovenian settlement area. First, it gives a historical overview of dealing with geographical names in Slovenia and especially emphasizes their scholarly and cartographic significance. Then it presents macrotoponyms and microtoponyms, especially geographical names in Slovenian normative guides, names of countries, and foreign exonyms for Slovenian endonyms. All of this is connected with the United Nations Group of Experts on Geographical Names (UNGEGN) and the Slovenian Government Commission for the Standardization of Geographical Names. The former body handles geographical names globally and the latter nationally.

"This Guidance sets out the legislation, policy and procedures on: applications for changing the name of the statutory corporation conducting the college, a registered name and/or a business (trading name); use of prescribed and sensitive words such as "trust", "national", "university" or "polytechnic"; and, use of misleading names including possible action if an offence has occurred." - introduction.

Ausgehend von einem sozialkonstruktivistischen, pragmatisch-kognitiven Verständnis von Namen untersucht die Studie die diskriminierenden Wahrnehmungen, die über Personen-namen in Deutschland und Schweden aufgerufen werden. Durch Anwendung der kritischen Theorien und Zugänge der Black Feminist, Postcolonial, Postmigrant, Trans und Disability Studies auf Namensdiskurse werden gegenwärtige sowie historische hegemoniale Normen dekonstruiert. Mit Hilfe des durch intersektionale Machtverhältnisse konstituierten Dispositivmodells wird die Intelligibilität von Personennamen zur Diskussion gestellt. Vergewohnheitung (accustoming) als neues analytisches Konzept macht nachvollziehbar, wie hegemoniales Wissen zu Namensgebung auf strukturalistische und essentialisierende Weise erworben und internalisiert wird. Die Analyse administrativer und legislativer Diskurse zeigt, wie hegemoniale Namensnormen historisch und institutionell vergewohnheitet wurden. Dass ein Personenname institutionell auch durch individuelle Wahrnehmung bestimmt wird, illustriert die Analyse des 'Kindeswohl', einem zentralen Argument für Namensentscheidungen auf Standesämtern. Ein weiteres Beispiel für die Rechtfertigung ent_wahrgenommener diskriminierender Namenspraktiken ist das Sprachgefühlkonzept, dessen Verwendung daraufhin untersucht wird, inwiefern es nationalistische Vorstellungen des Eigenen und des Anderen aufruft. Schließlich wird die An- und Aberkennung von Menschsein als Konsequenz diskriminierender Namenshandlungen adressiert. Eine Sammlung empowernder Interventionen in diskriminierende Namenspraktiken sowie Empfehlungen für eine kontra_diskriminierende, antistrukturalistische Wahrnehmung von Personennamen runden die Studie ab. Mit ihrem transdisziplinären Ansatz veranschaulicht die Arbeit, wie disziplinäre Grenzen überschritten und Diskursfelder und -materialien, die traditionellerweise in den Rechts-, Geschichts-, Sprach- und Literaturwissenschaften analysiert werden, in die Genderforschung integriert werden können. ; Based on a social constructivist, pragmatic cognitive understanding of naming, the study investigates the discriminatory hegemonic presuppositions and perceptions that are interpellated with personal names in Germany and Sweden. The critical lens of Black Feminist, Postcolonial, Postmigrant, Critical Trans and Disability Studies is applied in order to deconstruct current and past hegemonic naming norms. By regarding the un/intelligibility of names as constituted by intersecting power relations, racism_genderism_ableism_migratism_ classism, the dispositive model helps to identify what personal names and naming practices are made un/thinkable. Accustoming is introduced as an analytic tool to understand how hegemonic knowledge on naming is acquired and internalized in a structuralist and essentializing way. The analysis of administrative and legislative discourses demonstrates how hegemonic naming norms have been historically and institutionally accustomed. That a personal name is not only determined by institutional but also by individual decision-making is illustrated on the example of the child's well-being, a commonly used argument for name decisions at registry offices. The feel for language as another norm to justify de_perceived name discrimination is analyzed against the background of how sprachgefühl as an emotive concept interpellates nationalist images of the self and the Other. The final chapter addresses the consequences of discriminatory naming practices: the definition and denial of personhood. The study concludes with a collection of empowering interventions in discriminatory naming practices and recommendations for a contra_ discriminatory anti-structuralist perception of personal names. By employing a transdisciplinary approach, the study illustrates how disciplinary boundaries are transgressed and how different discourse areas and material that traditionally are investigated in law, history, linguistics and literature is integrated in Gender Studies research.

"U.S. Government Printing Office: 1976 O -209-563"--V.I, p. 790. ; "Prepared by the Geographic Names Division, Army Map Service, Washington, D.C., 20315, September 1968." ; Volume I. A-L -- volume II. M-Z. ; Mode of access: Internet.

Human names have a significant role in the history of humanity. However, it cannot be considered that history started from the moment when names had started being known. It is important to take into consideration mythic characters in mythological system. In this case spreading mythic characters without names is as hard as spreading myths without characters. This means that character names is the base of formation of the notion about mythological system. As well as in other countries, in Kazakh history different models of human names and the system of names that demonstrate national existence were formed. There is a tradition of giving name to a newborn child that is only intrinsic for Kazakh people. This means that Kazakh anthroponomy is distinctively significant evidence of congenital characteristics of Kazakh people, traditional Kazakh world outlook, ideology, political and social conditions in historical periods, a lifestyle closely linked to the ecosystem, and even environment and animals. The importance of Kazakh anthroponymy is that high, that it is not enough to consider it only as one of the evidences of the ethnos formation, it also should be considered that anthroponomy is a significant historical and spiritual step in arranging and settling the inherent nature of Kazakh nation that started their own way of development. It is also possible to see what beliefs Kazakh people hold, what political and ideological beliefs they were dependent on, what aspects they tried to imitate when giving names referring to historical reasons. Every literate person must understand that names such as Bitkoz, Bokbasar, Tezek, Kotibar that have negative meaning or such as Sovetkhan, Kolkhozbek, Sovkhozbek, Democrat, Decret, Mels (Marx-Engels-Lenin-Stalin), Kim (Communistic International of Youth), Renat (Revolution-Science-Work), Leninshil, Maskeubay, Oktyabr, Syezbek, Orysbay, Chapai, Ernest, Clara, Roza, Zhanna, Gulzhana, Asema, Gulnara are not appropriate for fresh minded, free spirited and independent Kazakh people. This means that when giving name to a newborn child it is not right to selfishly 147 choose the name, but it is important to take into account that he is the part of Kazakh ethnos. This is one way of serving to the national distinctiveness, independence and freedom.

In einer Pressekonferenz vom 21. Mai 2019 brachte der japanische Außenminister seinen Wunsch zum Ausdruck, dass Journalisten und Journalistinnen zukünftig in fremdsprachigen Texten für Namen von Japanern und Japanerinnen die auf Japanisch übliche Reihenfolge verwendeten, also zunächst den Familiennamen gefolgt vom Rufnamen. Regierungsbehörden begannen daraufhin damit, ihre englischsprachigen (Internet-)Publikationen entsprechend anzupassen und die bisher verwendete Reihenfolge zu ändern. Der Beitrag setzt sich mit den Gründen sowie den Vor- und Nachteilen der Änderung auseinander und bewertet diese kritisch. Der Autor erkennt Nachteile der in englischen Texten üblichen Reihenfolge (also Ruf- gefolgt vom Familiennamen) an, argumentiert jedoch, dass ihre Vorteile gleichwohl überwögen und sie insbesondere zu einer größeren Einheitlichkeit führe. (Die Redaktion) ; In a press conference of 21 May 2019, the Japanese Minister for Foreign Affairs stated that he hoped journalists writing in English and other foreign languages would refer to the names of Japanese persons according to the order commonly followed in the Japanese language, that is, family name first and given name last (Japanese naming order (JNO)). This was followed up by government bodies changing the order in English (internet) publications where they had previously resorted to English naming order (ENO). This article critically assesses the reasons for as well as the advantages and disadvantages of the use of JNO and ENO in English texts. While acknowledging difficulties that arise with ENO, the author argues that the use of ENO for all names in an English text presents a number of advantages, including most importantly a noticeable increase in overall consistency. (The Editors)

Includes "Arizona Place Names*: A Compilation of the Names of Arizona's Cities Villages and Settlements, Early Stage and Mordern Railroad Stations, Its Mountains and Canyons, Lakes and Streams, Springs and Desert Water Holes, Long Forgotten Minning Towns, Military Posts and Camps, Their Origin, Meaning, and History.". ; This item is part of the Arizona Agriculture and Rural Life, 1820-1945 collection. For more information about this collection, email repository@u.library.arizona.edu.

Marital names shape our ideas about marriage, about our children, and about our selves. For about a hundred years, American states required married women to take their husbands' names in order to engage in basic civic activities such as voting. While the law no longer requires women to change their names, it still shapes people's decisions about marital names in both formal and informal ways. For example, the formal legal default rule in most places is that both spouses keep their premarital names. This rule is minoritarian for women, which means it imposes a range of social costs on women who make the most conventional naming choice. But the rule is majoritarian for men, which means it does nothing to unsettle the most robust aspect of our current marital naming conventions--the fact that men almost never change their names, even to hyphenate. This fact about men's names--coupled with the fact that children almost always have their father's name, even if their mother makes an unconventional naming choice for herself--means that women are ostensibly choosing their marital names, but in fact they are choosing from a very limited decision set. That is, women effectively can have nominal continuity either with their past (their families of origin and premarital selves) or with their future (their children and possibly their spouse), but not across all three generations. The formal legal default that both spouses keep their names reinforces this bind for women. Informally, legal institutions also shape choices through "desk-clerk law," that is, advice given by the government functionaries who answer public inquiries at state and local agencies. These legal actors frequently mislead people and discourage unconventional naming choices as a result of ignorance or their own views about proper practice. Because states historically reinforced a regime of patrilineal descent of names, what might seem a neutral default regime is inadequate. States should set defaults and frame choices to encourage more egalitarian decisions about whether to change names and how. States could try any number of creative solutions using existing categories for thinking about choice regimes, drawn from contract-law theory: default rules (what rule the state fills in if the parties don't speak to the contrary); menus (what range of options parties are given); and altering rules (what steps parties must take to contract around the default rule into different alternatives). Most modestly, states could adopt a "forced choosing" approach, requiring both spouses to state their postmarital names. More ambitiously, states might encourage hyphenation and, at the next generation, "biphenation"--defined as the passing of one name from each hyphenated parent--by making this the default option. States could also create what might be called "framing rules," which would dictate how the state asks the question of parties in a choice regime. Framing rules encompass what information the state gives parties, what words it uses, what context surrounds the question, as well as the timing of the question. Framing rules are particularly important in contexts, such as marital names, where social conventions exert a strong influence on choices, and where desk-clerk law is likely to be erroneous or misleading.