In contrastive linguistics of English and German, there is a tradition of accounting for contrasts with respect to grammar and, to a lesser extent, for lexis and phonetics. Moving on to discourse and text, there is a sizeable body of literature on cohesive patterns in English and German respectively - but very little in terms of a comparison. The latter, though, is of particular interest for language learners, translators and, of course, linguists and researchers in language technology. This book attempts to close this gap, based on a number of years of corpus-based study into variation and cohesion in the two languages. While there is an overall focus on language contrasts, it also investigates variation between different registers language-internally, and between written and spoken mode in particular. For each of the five major types of cohesion (co-reference, substitution, ellipsis, conjunctive relations and lexical cohesion), overviews are given of contrasts in the system and of contrastive frequencies in texts. Results and methods presented in this book are thus relevant for language teaching, translation, language technology and corpus-based work on English and German generally.
The topic of this work is nominal coreference in English and German. Its focus is on coreference relations that establish textual coherence and continuity above the local level of the clause. The book shows how linguistic options for creating coreference in English and German can be interpreted against the background of their motivating factors. It discusses mental text processing, German-English systemic contrasts and register peculiarities as possible sources for variation on different linguistic levels. Hermeneutic and example-based observations are complemented by a corpus-linguistic analysis of English and German political essays and German translations from the English originals. The study finally highlights linguistic and functional correlations of coreference instantiations in English and German texts, additionally shedding light on coreference strategies employed in translations. It thus yields an incentive for future research as well as providing a wealth of insights for language and translation teaching.
Remarkably, the core element of labour relations?wage determination?has been excluded from the European social dialogue about harmonisation of working conditions and national systems of social security. The present study responds by analysing the prospects of building up structures of wage formation in Europe through a reevaluation of collective bargaining and collective agreements as they exist under the law of the most industrialized Member States. The impetus for the study is the widely debated crisis of the system of concluding regional collective agreements on wages. Social partners seem to have been trapped in fruitless conflicts on how the system must be reformed. It has become obvious that no party concerned employers, trade unions, the state has the capacity to resolve the growing difficulties of collective wage formation. In an introductory essay by the distinguished editors, this important study takes the situation in Germany, the most prominent manifestation of this European crisis, as its starting point. Then, academic experts from France, the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, and Sweden describe comparable problems in their own countries, detail approaches to dealing with them, and provide a critical commentary, including judgements and suggestions in relation to the German case. Then follows a reexamination of the situation in Germany in the light of the experience of the other countries. A final chapter outlines some preliminary interpretations of European prospects. Salient issues investigated include the following: the erosion of such ideological and legal categories and concepts as `dependent work, `solidarity', `subsidiarity' and `social self-regulation' as preconditions of traditional collective bargaining structures at national level; the decreasing membership of the bargaining partners on both sides; the shrinking rate of employees covered by collective agreements; attempts to establish a national social pact; increasing competition on global markets; decentralizing management strategies, including the abandonment of collective bargaining; and, individualized employees. The authors examine the various state structures to determine if the legal and institutional developments of the different national systems of collective bargaining constitute starting points for mutual learning in order to meet the new challenges. This leads to a discussion of which practices are successful in their original environment, and how these practices might adapt to other systems in other countries.
The present volume, "Organoosmium Compounds" 8 6, systematically covers the litera ture through 1992, including many later references. This volume is the first published of Series 8. This series is devoted to compounds containing two or more osmium atoms. The volume forms a unit with" Organoosmium Compounds" 8 5 (in preparation). 80th volumes deal with trinuclear compounds with ligands other than CO which are bonded to Os by one carbon atom ("1L ligands "), regardless of whether the ligand is additionally coordinated to Os by heteroatoms. Generally CO groups are additional ligands. As is usual in the organometallic Gmelin series, the term "trinuclear" means three osmium atoms in the molecule without regard to any additional metals that may be present. The content and the subdivision of both volumes are described on p. 1. Volume 85 will deal with homometallic compounds in which the bonding C atom of the leading 1L ligand is bonded to Os by one non-bridging Os-C bond. The first part of the present volume, 86, is devoted to homometallic compounds in which the bonding C atom of the 1L ligand bridges two or three Os atoms. A second part deals with all heterometallic compounds with 1L ligands other than CO. An Empirical Formula Index and a Ligand Formula Index for both volumes 8 5 and 86 will be included in volume 8 5. For abbreviations and dimensions used throughout this volume, see p. X.
Kerstin von Lingen shows how Nazi SS-General Karl Wolff avoided war crimes prosecution because of his role in "Operation Sunrise," negotiations conducted by high-ranking American, Swiss, and British officials - in violation of the Casablanca agreements with the Soviet Union - for the surrender of German forces in Italy. Von Lingen suggests that the Cold War started already with "Operation Sunrise," and helps us understand rollback operations thereafter: one was the failure of justice and selective prosecution for high ranking Nazi criminals. The Western Allies not only failed to ensure cooperation between their respective national war crimes prosecution organizations, but in certain cases even obstructed justice by withholding evidence from the prosecution.
This book traces victims’ active participatory rights through different procedural stages in adversarial and non-adversarial justice systems, in an attempt to identify what role victims play during criminal proceedings in the domestic setting. Braun analyses countries with different legal traditions, including: the United States, England, Wales and Australia (as examples of mostly adversarial countries); Germany and France (as examples of inquisitorial systems); as well as Denmark and Sweden with their mixed inquisitorial-adversarial background. Victim Participation Rights is distinctive in that it assesses the implementation of formal processes and procedures concerning victim participation at three different procedural stages: first, investigation and pre-trial; second, trial and sentencing; and third, post-trial with a focus on appeal and parole. In addition, Braun provides an in-depth case study on the general position of victims in criminal trials, especially in light of national criminal justice policy, in Germany, a mostly inquisitorial system and Australia, a largely adversarial system. In light of its findings, the book ponders whether, at this stage in time, a greater focus on victim protection rather than on active procedural rights could be more beneficial to enhancing the overall experience of victims. In this context, it takes a close look at the merits of introducing or expanding legal representation schemes for victims.
This publication is the result of an international and interdisciplinary expert meeting at Technische Universität Berlin, in March 2020. The aim of the expert meeting was to collaboratively write and publish a book, within five days, on the central question: Which organizational structures and processes at universities support a strategic as well as innovative campus development? As experts with an interdisciplinary background including the social sciences, public real estate, urban planning, architecture and landscape architecture, we could examine the question from a holistic perspective and gain new insights. The resulting manifesto states necessary steps and strategies to create innovative and sustainable hybrid environments for universities. It addresses all decision makers – executives, practitioners and contributors alike – as all of us face the challenge of limited resources and needing to do more with less.
The topic of this work is nominal coreference in English and German. Its focus is on coreference relations that establish textual coherence and continuity above the local level of the clause. The book shows how linguistic options for creating coreference in English and German can be interpreted against the background of their motivating factors. It discusses mental text processing, German-English systemic contrasts and register peculiarities as possible sources for variation on different linguistic levels. Hermeneutic and example-based observations are complemented by a corpus-linguistic analysis of English and German political essays and German translations from the English originals. The study finally highlights linguistic and functional correlations of coreference instantiations in English and German texts, additionally shedding light on coreference strategies employed in translations. It thus yields an incentive for future research as well as providing a wealth of insights for language and translation teaching.
In contrastive linguistics of English and German, there is a tradition of accounting for contrasts with respect to grammar and, to a lesser extent, for lexis and phonetics. Moving on to discourse and text, there is a sizeable body of literature on cohesive patterns in English and German respectively - but very little in terms of a comparison. The latter, though, is of particular interest for language learners, translators and, of course, linguists and researchers in language technology. This book attempts to close this gap, based on a number of years of corpus-based study into variation and cohesion in the two languages. While there is an overall focus on language contrasts, it also investigates variation between different registers language-internally, and between written and spoken mode in particular. For each of the five major types of cohesion (co-reference, substitution, ellipsis, conjunctive relations and lexical cohesion), overviews are given of contrasts in the system and of contrastive frequencies in texts. Results and methods presented in this book are thus relevant for language teaching, translation, language technology and corpus-based work on English and German generally.
Studienarbeit aus dem Jahr 2011 im Fachbereich Psychologie - Klinische Psychologie, Psychopathologie, Prävention, Note: 1, Alpen-Adria-Universität Klagenfurt (Institut für Psychologie), Veranstaltung: Gesundheitspsychologische Forschung, Sprache: Deutsch, Abstract: Die Erfassung und Bewertung von Schmerz stellt für den klinischen Alltag und die Berufsgruppen, die ihn regelmäßig bewältigen, eine äußerst wichtige Aufgabe dar. Ethische, juristische - vor allem aber menschliche Prinzipien (Herr, Coyne, Key et al. 2006a) besagen, dass jede Patientin und jeder Patient das Recht auf eine adäquate Schmerzbehandlung hat. Wird dieses wichtige Element in der Arbeit mit PatientInnengruppen nicht fachgerecht durchgeführt, ergeben sich häufig schwerwiegende Konsequenzen: neben der Gefahr für klinische Praktiker, neue Erkrankungen zu übersehen, verbleiben betroffene Menschen in häufig sehr leidvollen Zuständen, die wahrscheinlich verhindert hätten werden können. Vor allem also großes menschliches Leid, aber auch explodierende Kosten im Gesundheits- und Pflegesystem, zählen zu den gravierenden Folgen vernachlässigter und / oder fehlerhafter Schmerzbeurteilung (Chapman 2009). Es muss aber auch angeführt werden, dass Schmerzerfassung häufig ein recht schwieriges Unterfangen ist, das selbst Fachleute vor sehr große Hindernisse zu stellen vermag. Dies erklärt sich aus der Eigenschaft des Schmerzes, in erster Linie ein sehr subjektives Erlebnis zu sein (Herr et. al 2006a). Aus diesem Grund ist es auch kaum oder nur sehr schwer möglich, dieses Phänomen mit Hilfe eines objektiven Tests zu erfassen. Die Methode der Wahl ist demnach wohl, den Patienten selbst zu Wort kommen zu lassen, um sein individuelles Schmerzerlebnis in eigenen Worten zu umschreiben (ebd.). Doch was, wenn der Patient dazu aus bestimmten Gründen nicht in der Lage ist? Was, wenn er oder sie wegen einer fortschreitenden dementiellen Entwicklung eine schwere kognitive Beeinträchtigung aufweist? Bekannt ist, dass die Fähigkeit, Schmerzempfinden zu beschreiben, bei dementen Patienten eingeschränkt ist (Kunz et al. 2007). Zudem beschweren sie sich seltener über Schmerz. Ihnen werden deshalb auch weniger Schmerzmittel verabreicht. Verändert sich also bei diesen Patienten die Schmerzverarbeitung durch ihre Erkrankung (Lautenbacher et al. 2007)?
This will help us customize your experience to showcase the most relevant content to your age group
Please select from below
Login
Not registered?
Sign up
Already registered?
Success – Your message will goes here
We'd love to hear from you!
Thank you for visiting our website. Would you like to provide feedback on how we could improve your experience?
This site does not use any third party cookies with one exception — it uses cookies from Google to deliver its services and to analyze traffic.Learn More.