Full-text resources of CEJSH and other databases are now available in the new Library of Science.
Visit https://bibliotekanauki.pl

Results found: 5

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

Search:
in the keywords:  neutralization
help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
1
Content available remote

Elementy dialektalne w przekładach Padre padrone Gavina Leddy

100%
Ślarzyńska M.
Między Oryginałem a Przekładem
|
2015
|
vol. 30
25-39
EN
The article focuses on Polish translation of Gavino Ledda’s novel Padre padrone in the context of translations into other languages (English, German, Catalan). The main translational issue is the element of bilingualism inherently inscribed in the original text by introducing in brackets dialectal forms of some of Italian expressions. It is argued, by description of multiple functions of such an operation, that this element is a part of a wider structure of the novel and cannot be eliminated without losing some important features, of both the plot and the characters. Elimination or retention of this constructional element results, to some extent, from general tendencies of the target culture.
2
Content available remote

Klad a zápor po slovesech bránění

88%
Kopecký J.
Naše řeč (Our Speech)
|
2012
|
vol. 95
|
issue 5
225-238
EN
The paper deals with the meaning and distribution of the negative and positive content clauses following verbs of preventing (e.g. bránit ‘prevent’, zakázat ‘forbid’) in Czech. It has often been assumed that the negation in these clauses is neutralized, thus the negative and positive clauses have the same meaning and can both be used in standard Czech. The analyses of constructions containing the verbs bránit, zabránit and zakázat, based on the Czech National Corpus, reveal that negative clauses after these verbs are less frequent than positive ones, and that sentences with a non-neutralized negation in the content clause, expressing the opposite of the positive clause, are also used.
3
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Demilitarization and neutralization – the case of the Åland Islands

71%
Brańka T.
Przegląd Politologiczny
|
2017
|
issue 4
189-204
PL
Demilitaryzacja i neutralizacja należą do katalogu szczególnych ograniczeń wykonywania zwierzchnictwa terytorialnego. Pomimo, iż są to rozwiązania stosowane w praktyce międzynarodowej stosunkowo często, to brakuje powszechnie uznanej definicji tych kategorii. Prowadzi to do wielu różnych podejść interpretacyjnych, co szczególnie wyraźnie widać w odniesieniu do demilitaryzacji. Klastycznym przykładem obszaru zmilitaryzowanego i zneutralizowanego są Wyspy Alandzkie. Ze względu na swoje strategiczne położenie kilkukrotnie stały się ważnym elementem politycznych rozgrywek pomiędzy mocarstwami w Europie, na przestrzeni ostatnich dwóch stuleci. Wyspy postrzegano bowiem jako swoisty klucz do realizacji bałtyckiej polityki i równoważenia sił europejskich potęg. Konflikty, które targały regionem w XIX w., doprowadziły do stopniowego wypracowania rozwiązań demilitaryzacji, a później neutralizacji archipelagu, co zostało ostatecznie uregulowane w 1921 r. w międzynarodowej konwencji i potwierdzone po zakończeniu II wojny światowej. Przyjęty wtedy status prawnomiędzynarodowy archipelagu zachował trwałość, a obecnie służy jako swoisty wzorzec efektywnej demilitaryzacji i neutralizacji.
EN
Demilitarization and neutralization are among the specific restrictions that apply to the exercise of territorial sovereignty. Although frequently employed in international practice, no generally accepted definitions are available for either of these concepts. The void has given rise to a host of interpretations, which vary particularly widely in the case of demilitarization. The Åland Islands are a classic example of an area that has been both militarized and neutralized. Owing to its strategic location, it has repeatedly become the focal point of political clashes between European powers over the last two centuries. The Islands were seen as a key to pursuing Baltic Sea policies and balancing the strengths of European powers. The conflicts that swept through the region in the 19th century led to the gradual improvement of methods to demilitarize and subsequently neutralize the archipelago. Its status was ultimately settled in 1921 by an international convention and recognized after the end of World War II. The international legal status granted to the archipelago at that time has persisted to this day and continues to serve as a model of effective demilitarization and neutralization.
4
Content available remote

Final stops in Indo-European: their phonological classification as a key to the Proto-Indo-European root structure constraint

63%
Lipp R.
Slovo a slovesnost: časopis pro otázky teorie a kultury jazyka (Slovo a slovesnost: A journal for the theory of language and language cultivation)
|
2016
|
vol. 77
|
issue 4
251-299
EN
The connection of the thesis advocated by Meillet and Gauthiot of the “implosive”, i.e. unreleased, character of final Proto-Indo-European (PIE) obstruents with the structuralist framework of the Prague School opens up the view for our understanding of the phonological structure of the obstruent or plosive system of PIE and several ancient daughter languages, because based on Trubetzkoy’s theory of neutralization and the archiphoneme the relevant correlation marks can be set up by determining the phonemic status of “implosives”, i.e. unreleased stops, in positions of neutralization. We can conclude that in word final position PIE displayed unreleased lenes (with the phonetic features [–tense, –voiced, –aspirated]), which due to the distinctive function of tenseness (and not voice) were phonologically classified as mediae (with the phonological features [–tense, –aspirated]) and not as tenues (with the phonological features [+tense, –aspirated]). This state of affairs is still reflected directly by the not closely related Indo-European (IE) languages Latin, Avestan and Lydian, and indirectly or less clearly by Hittite, Vedic, Greek, and rudimentarily by Old Persian, Celtic, Slavonic, and possibly by Germanic.
5
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Neutralizacja normy „nie kradnij” w genezie przestępczości nieletnich

55%
Stańdo-Kawecka B.
Archiwum Kryminologii
|
1994
|
issue XX
21-51
EN
The paper discusses the findings of a study aimed at an empirical verification of a well-known criminological concept: the Sykes and Matza concept of neutralization techniques from the classical trend of positivist criminology. What Sykes and Matza see as the factor of juvenile delinquency are mechanisms of justification of one’s own delinquent behavior. Reverting to functionalim, the authors assume a social consensus on the basic values and norms of behavior. Juvenile delinquents generally recognize the same values and norms as non-delinquent youth but, unlike that youth, they grow proficient in neutralizing those norms so as to prevent them from influencing their behavior. According to Sykes and Matza, norms are neutralized through finding and accepting justifications for one’s own deviant behavior. Five types of such neutralization techniques heve been distinguished according to the contents of those justifications: denial of responsibility, denial of injury, denial of the victim, condemnation of the condemners, and appeal to higher loyalties. In their conception of neutralization  techniques, G.M. Sykes and D. Matza mainly describe and classify the ways of excusing one’s own deviant behavior and provide but a perfunctory discussion of the mechanizm of neutralization itself. L. Festinger’s theory of cognitive dissonance proves useful in explaining the psychological mechanizm of neutralization of recognized norms. Assumptions of the conception of neutralization techniques and the theory of cognitive dissonance provided the grounds for hypotheses which were subsequently submitted to empirical verification. The subject was limited to neutralization of the rule “do not steal” interpreted as a ban appropriation on theft and a rule of respect for another person’s property. Criminologists have long questioned the desing of empirical study where achool youth are treated as non-delinquent and examined as a control group oppesed to juvenile delinquents in houses of correction or educational institutions. In the present study, three groups were examined: ‒ juvenile delinquents confined to a reformatory or home for detained juveniles by a judicial decision as perpetrators of offences against property (84 persons); ‒ school youth not involved in acts against another person’s property, called non-delinquent youth (70 persons); ‒ school youth involved in acts againts another person’s property, called actually delinquent (37 persons); The groups of “non-delinquent” and “actually delinquent” persons were distinguished from school youth by means of a self-report survey. Of the original hypotheses, only one was confirmed by the findings. The exemined groups appeared to differ significantly in their approval of the techniques of neutralization of the norm of honesty, the differences trending as expected. The lowest approval of statements expressing various excuses for breaches of another person’s property was found among the non-delinquent youth. The group that most often approves ot such excuses are wards of  reformatories and juvenile homes; however, they do not differ much in this respect from the actually delinquent youth. All of the examined groups have similar priorities as to the separate types of excuses. The type accepted most often is “condemnation of the condemners”. In particular, a statement that “the police and judges are corruptible and malicious”enjoys great popularity. The types  accepted least often, instead, are excuses consisting in “denial of injury” and “appeal to higher loyalties”. What could not be conformed are hypotheses as to absence of differences between the groups with respect to appraisal of one’s own honesty and acceptance of the rule “do not steal”. Non -delinquent youth appraise themselves much higher in terms of honesty than the remaining two groups. Wards of reformatories and juvenile homes, instead, appraise themselves somewhat lower than the actually delinquent youth. The non-delinquent youth show the strongest acceptance of the norm of honesty. The degree of acceptance of that norm among wards of reformatories is similar to that among actual  delinquents, the former showing a somewhat stronger acceptance of the rule “do not steal” than the actually delinquent group. Another hypothesis that was not confirmed concerned a tendency to neutralize the rule “do not steal” once it has been violated; the method used here was projection where the respondents were to complete unfinished stories.  Against expectations, the tendency to neutralize that norm once it has been violated appeared to occur much more often among school youth than among wards of reformatories and juvenile homes. Of the various methods of reducing the anxiety resulting from a breach of another person’s property, both groups of school youth most often suggested neutralization of the norm of honesty. Wards of institutions, instead, much more often mentioned methods other than neutralization of the violated norm: e.g., focus on the derived or potential profit, or focus on the absence of threat with any negative consequences from without. The study questioned the role of delinquent neutralizations as conceived by Sykes and Matza in the origin of juvenile delinquency.  Unforfunately, the findings could not be interpreted explicitly. According to the theoretical assumptions made, a number of possible explanations of the  findings can be suggested which at least party exclude one another. A new empirical study would be necessary to verify those explanations.
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.