Plural Term Research Articles

Nebulae or galaxies? The history of a change in astronomical terminology

While today the term ‘galaxy’ is a household word primarily associated with the huge congregations of stars far outside the Milky Way, until about 1950 these structures were generally known as ‘nebulae’. Although the singular form ‘galaxy’ was commonly used, it was typically considered as just another word for the Milky Way. Edwin Hubble’s celebrated discovery in the 1920s of the extragalactic nature of the spirals was for a long time referred to as the discovery of ‘extragalactic nebulae’, whereas the plural term ‘galaxies’ was only employed by a minority of astronomers. In fact, it took until about 1960 before our current usage became commonly accepted and the spiral nebulae became spiral galaxies. The paper focuses on the words of and related to extragalactic astronomy as they were used historically in the period from about 1920 to 1960.

Бурятские эквативно-симилятивные конструкции со сказуемым адли ‘похожий; такой же’

The Buryat equative-similative word adli ‘similar; the same’ can be used as a nominal predicate expressing a comparison between persons, objects, abstract notions, or events. The components can be NPs or clauses. The construction variants form a system primarily determined by information structure. The subject position is held by the equation component in the focus of attention: it can be the comparee, both the comparee and the standard, or the parameter of comparison. When the comparee is in focus, the standard is marked by either the dative-locative (the pattern ‘A is similar to B’) or the comitative (to express metaphoric equation and equation of events). When both equation components are in focus, the subject is either a generalizing term in the plural or a pair of coordinated NPs or clauses (the pattern ‘A and B are similar’/‘They are similar’). The parameter of comparison in both variants can be expressed by an NP in an instrumental case (‘…similar in (lit. with) size’). When it is in focus, it takes the subject position, with both equation components (verbalized with a plural term encom-passing both or through a coordinated pair) realized as attributes in the genitive (‘Their/A and B’s size is similar’). The corpus data indicate that this construction is mostly used for the comparison of persons and objects (expressed by nouns, extremely rarely by headless relative clauses); comparison of events (expressed by clauses, extremely rarely by event nouns) is less frequent. One specific variant with an auxiliary quotation verb is used for equative comparison of an event with a cultural stereotype (through citing proverbs, etc.).

The Oxford Handbook of Victorian Medievalism, edited by Joanne Parker and Corinna Wagner

Reviewed by: The Oxford Handbook of Victorian Medievalism ed. by Joanne Parker and Corinna Wagner Ann F. Howey (bio) The Oxford Handbook of Victorian Medievalism, edited by Joanne Parker and Corinna Wagner; pp. xx + 688. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press, 2020, £110.00, $145.00. Joanne Parker and Corinna Wagner, in their introduction to The Oxford Handbook of Victorian Medievalism, clearly articulate the goal for this ambitious collection of essays: “to demonstrate that medievalism was as influential a cultural force in Britain . . . as was classical culture” throughout the nineteenth century (2). To accomplish that goal, the collection seeks to illustrate the “broad-ranging and diverse” nature of Victorian medievalism by examining “every major aspect” of the phenomenon “from the perspective of the many disciplines to which it is relevant today” (2, 4). Essays are therefore organized into six sections: Medievalism Before 1750 (4 chapters); Romantic Period Medievalism (6 chapters); Sources (9 chapters); Social, Political, and Religious Praxis (6 chapters); Arts and Architecture (7 chapters); and Literature (7 chapters). The chosen organization results in a number of strengths for the collection. As the section headings suggest, the collection is temporally diverse, beginning its study with texts and practices from long before the 1830s. Thus, although its title might signal the narrower temporal window of Victoria’s reign, the collection explores medievalisms throughout the long nineteenth century, and even earlier in its opening section. The book as a whole communicates a sense of the evolution of medievalism—that is, how later eras (re)constructed and engaged with the medieval era (variously defined) as soon as that era ended; charting an evolution of attitudes and tastes in the use of medieval materials is often a focus of individual chapters as well. Some chapters extend that evolution past the Victorian period, with reference to the continuing appearances of the medieval today. For example, John Haines’s “Medievalist Music and Dance” gestures to the legacy of Victorian music-hall in post-Victorian cinema; Parker’s “Anglo-Saxonism and the Victorian Novel” ends by considering these novels as the “roots of our contemporary culture” and citing twenty-first-century fiction and television (652); Inga Bryden’s “Tennyson and the Return of King Arthur” references the ongoing vogue for Arthurian objects. The Handbook’s evolutionary focus usefully debunks any notion that [End Page 681] the Victorians were doing something completely new in their recourse to the medieval past for literary, artistic, architectural, religious, and political inspiration, while simultaneously recognizing the importance of their scholarly, creative, theological, and political engagements with that past. The collection also traces evolutions across geographies. For example, the Sources section contains essays on Anglo-Saxon poetry (M. J. Toswell) and Anglo-Saxon sculpture (Jane Hawkes), Geoffrey Chaucer (Richard Utz), Irish and Welsh sources (Huw Pryce), Scottish literature and Arts and Crafts (Sarah Dunnigan and Gerard Carruthers), Italian influences such as Giovanni Boccaccio (Eleonora Sasso), and Old Norse-Icelandic texts (Carl Phelpstead). Geographical diversity goes further than the diverse objects of British medievalist study in the period, however. Chapters such as Francis G. Gentry’s “Medievalism as an Instrument of Political Renewal in Nineteenth-Century Germany” or Elizabeth Emery and Janet T. Marquardt’s “The Influence of French Medievalism on Victorian Britain” investigate similarities and differences between medievalisms in other European countries. Other essays—for example Kathleen Davis and Nadia R. Altschul’s “Orientalism, Medievalism, Colonialism, and Militarized Mercantilism” and G. A. Bremner’s “The Gothic Revival beyond Europe”— trace the British export of medievalism to other parts of the globe, whether in colonial attitudes or in architectural designs. As with the temporal diversity of the collection, this geographic diversity demonstrates the way that medievalism affected virtually every sphere of nineteenth-century life. In addition, it suggests the ways that people in a variety of national contexts adapted medievalism to their local circumstances and deployed it for their own purposes, emphasizing the malleability of medievalism and the suitability of the plural term medievalisms. The collection also impresses because of the variety of fields covered and approaches employed. Literature is well-represented throughout, from the Ballad Revival (David Matthews), the Lake Poets (Tom Duggett), and Sir Walter Scott’s novels (James Watt) to...

Toward pluralizing ecology: Finding common ground across sociocultural and scientific perspectives

AbstractEcologists increasingly work with people from other fields, in which scholars, practitioners, and activists often pluralize: “ecologies.” By contrast, biophysical ecologists use the singular. Specialists beyond ecological science may avoid the singular because it evokes environmental determinism, lack of human agency, and disrespect for ways of knowing beyond science. Some social analysts consider biophysical ecology itself to be but one way of knowing, which embodies social positioning and uneven power relations. For their part, ecologists often ignore discussions featuring the term “ecologies” as unrelated to their work. The authors—one anthropologist and two biophysical ecologists—wish to facilitate social–ecological interaction by evaluating the conceptual content of the plural versus singular contrast. We suggest there are fundamental differences between ecology in the singular and plural. We examine these differences by showing that the singular and the plural within ecological science differ in specificity versus generality. In the view of social critiques, however, the conflict reflects political power differentials and social position of science. We explore whether there are productive parallels between these contrasting implications of the singular versus plural. Social criticisms of singular ecology include lack of system openness, open‐ended dynamics, contingent pathways of change, and human agency in ecological processes. We find value in these critiques and have grappled with these issues ourselves. We find that contemporary ecology often employs concepts amenable to those in social critiques. This finding demonstrates why ecologists should not be so quick to dismiss plural ecology as a meaningful phrase. We show that concerns of the social critiques embodied in the plural term parallel ecology's use of (1) multiple models to understand a topic, (2) multifaceted, scalable concepts, and (3) nested dialog between generality and specificity. We conclude that the use of the plural and singular actually share a conceptual foundation that can facilitate interdisciplinary integration and scholarship. Furthermore, the emerging awareness by ecologists of the concerns about the politics of power in science and its use may improve the ability of ecologists not only to interact with social scientists but also to better engage with social movements and environmental justice.

Optimal Terminology for Services in the United States That Incorporate Horses to Benefit People: A Consensus Document

Objectives: To recommend (1) the adoption of optimal terminology for referring to services in the United States that incorporate horses and other equines to benefit people, and (2) the discontinuation of especially problematic terminology. Design: A diverse multidisciplinary consortium of individuals, including representatives of relevant national organizations, participated in an inclusive, systematic, and comprehensive 2-year consensus-building process. Results: Twelve specific types of services were identified that relate to one of three broad areas of professional work: therapy, learning, or horsemanship. Related to the area of therapy, five distinct types of therapies were identified: counseling, occupational therapy, physical therapy, psychotherapy, and speech-language pathology. Therapy-first language is recommended that foregrounds the exact therapy (e.g., physical therapy) and adds precise equine-related descriptors as warranted (e.g., physical therapy using equine movement). Related to the area of learning, three distinct types of nontherapy services were identified. The recommended terminology for referring to these services is equine-assisted learning in education, equine-assisted learning in organizations, and equine-assisted learning in personal development. Related to the area of horsemanship, four distinct types of nontherapy services were identified. The recommended terminology for referring to these services is adaptive equestrian sports, adaptive riding or therapeutic riding, driving, and interactive vaulting. The plural term, equine-assisted services, is recommended as a concise shorthand for easily referencing multiple services that differ from each other, yet share the horse as a common thread. Terms recommended for discontinuation include equine therapy, equine-assisted activities and therapies, equine-assisted therapy, equestrian therapy, hippotherapist, hippotherapy clinic (program), horse therapy, horseback riding therapy, and therapy riding. The consensus-building process culminated in extensive but not unanimous endorsements of all terminology recommendations. Conclusions: Terminology recommended for adoption clearly describes and distinguishes 12 distinct types of services. Terminology recommended for discontinuation was found to be ambiguous, misleading, no longer useful, or to have adversely affected stakeholders. It is hoped that all recommendations will prove useful and serve to enhance the professionalism and viability of specific identified services. It is also hoped that improved precision and clarity in terminology for naming specific services will advance their future scientific development and reliable measurement of effectiveness. Not all terminology-related challenges were resolved, however, and new challenges will likely arise as services continue to evolve and diversify. Significant impacts, if any, of the terminology recommendations herein merit ongoing monitoring and the question of optimal terminology merits revisiting in the foreseeable future.

Two Different Mechanisms for Generics

This paper primarily accounts for why IS generics cannot have the DG reading. The essence of the proposal is that the exceptions of the IS generics are to be explained by the group individual but the DG reading has the only option of the cover variable to accommodate exceptions. This clash results in the infelicity of the IS generic in the DG reading. Supporting evidence for Korean generics was found since Korean IS generics have the form of the bare-formed plural which is defined as a group individual. Yet, a difference between Korean generics and English generics is observed: Korean IS generics sometimes allow for the DG reading while English IS generics cannot. This paper argues that the difference comes from the fact that the Korean indefinite singular is an inherent group individual as a type of a plural term while the English indefinite singular is a forced group individual as basically a singular term. The inherent group can easily be shifted to the sum reading under special circumstances while the enforced group cannot.

Thietmars Medeburu(n) und ‚mel prohibe‘: Neues zum Oikonym Magdeborn in direktem linguistischen Zugriff und über eine Meta-Deutung

The author proposes a new interpretation of the history of the name of the former Saxon village and historical burgward Magdeborn. First, the endings -/- of , as Thietmar von Merseburg writes in his chronicle of 1012/1018, get a new explanation as *-ow or *-own. Second, it seems that both a linguistic and extralinguistic analysis of the obviously false interpretation of the Old Sorbian place name quoted by the chronicler himself may show the history of the place name in a new light. It is guessed that the chronicler had misunderstood the narrative about the name of the castle. A detailed analysis is offered of two other cases – the persiflage of the Kyrie eleison by Slavs as ukrivolsa and the mysterious provincia Nice – in which Thietmar seems to approach certain facts and their narration with a similar lack of comprehension. In conclusion, it is assumed that an earlier form of the oikonym Magdeborn was a semantically plural term: *Medobori or *Medoborьje, meaning ‚honey pine forest(s)‘. The two basic hypotheses about the oldest history of the name enable to think of a development from a plural regional name to an adjectival oikonym derived from the first. A third hypothesis goes still further in assuming that the name *Medobori or *Medoborьje had been developed from *Medjiborьje/ *Medziborьje, ‚among pine forests‘.

Frontier Country: The Politics of War in Early Pennsylvania by Patrick Spero

Reviewed by: Frontier Country: The Politics of War in Early Pennsylvania by Patrick Spero Keri Holt (bio) Frontier Country: The Politics of War in Early Pennsylvania patrick spero Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2016 343 pp. Frontier Country: The Politics of War in Early Pennsylvania takes a fraught term and redefines and contextualizes it in ways that illuminate its importance as the British American colonies transformed into an independent nation. The frontier, Patrick Spero writes, "was a politically potent word in the eighteenth century," and, using the colony of Pennsylvania as [End Page 262] a case study, Frontier Country examines how the complexities of "governing frontiers was … essential to the success or failure of colonial projects" (7, 8). By carefully reexamining this term and the role it played in American political discourse, print and popular culture, and day-to-day lived experience during the late seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, Spero offers significant arguments about the causes of the American Revolution and the influence of the frontier on early US nationalism, as well as the need to carefully historicize the terms we use to study the political and cultural dynamics of early America. For Spero, recognizing the importance of the frontier in colonial American and early national politics requires fundamentally reorienting and reinterpreting the term frontier itself. Conventionally, frontier has been understood as a spatial term marking the border or limit of a sovereign space. Although the location of a frontier can change, particularly in the context of national expansion, we typically assume frontiers to be sparsely populated spaces defined by activities of settlement and development located at the (relatively distant) boundaries of a state or nation. During the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, however, the term frontier marked a much more situational and transitory space defined not so much by set borders but by feelings of fear and uncertainty. During this period, writes Spero, "[f]rontiers formed—people and places became a frontier—when people felt a specific type of fear: invasion" (115). Although colonial borders were more susceptible to invasion than other spaces, the term frontier did not necessarily mark a clear boundary line but, instead, operated as a plural term that could mark multiple locations anywhere within a colony, depending on perceived threats. As a result, during the colonial period, frontiers were understood not so much as a location but as a particular kind of experience. "For those colonists who lived in fear of invasion, a frontier was more than a geopolitical abstraction that drove policy decisions. It was a personal experience that shaped their actions and beliefs," writes Spero (114). By examining this "traumatic process of becoming a frontier," this book offers a new lens for examining the causes of the Revolution and the changing expectations that the colonists had for their government over the course of the eighteenth century. In the end, argues Spero, "[t]he failure of the British Empire to provide for frontiers—indeed, its apparent turn against such zones and their inhabitants—became a central argument for independence" (222). [End Page 263] To make this argument, Spero offers an extensive analysis of the plural and shifting dimensions of frontiers in colonial Pennsylvania, focusing specifically on the experiences of people living on these frontiers and the growing distance between their experiences and the expectations and actions of the British Empire and the Pennsylvania colonial government. Pennsylvania experienced a much greater variety of frontier experiences than other colonies, particularly regarding its efforts to manage and defend these varied locales, and these diverse frontier experiences and policies were well documented in letters, newspaper articles, court cases, government proceedings, Quaker records, pamphlets, broadsides, and formal histories written throughout the colonial period. Spero provides a thorough and impressive assessment of these texts and contexts, assembling them into an engaging narrative history that traces Pennsylvania's transformation from a pacifist colony that was antithetical to the concept of frontiers to one whose government was increasingly preoccupied with frontier management. The politics of Pennsylvania's frontier management were exceedingly complicated and contradictory, and Spero does a masterful job explaining the varied and changing perceptions of invasion in colonial Pennsylvania, as well as the competing responses from the colonial governor, the Assembly...

Camera Graeca: Photographs, Narratives, Materialities ed. by Philip Carabott, Yannis Hamilakis, and Eleni Papargyriou

Reviewed by: Camera Graeca: Photographs, Narratives, Materialities ed. by Philip Carabott, Yannis Hamilakis, and Eleni Papargyriou Andrew Szegedy-Maszak (bio) Philip Carabott, Yannis Hamilakis, and Eleni Papargyriou, editors, Camera Graeca: Photographs, Narratives, Materialities. Centre for Hellenic Studies, King's College London, Publications 16. Farnham: Ashgate. 2015. Pp. xx + 375. 87 illustrations. Cloth $138. The 16 essays that comprise Camera Graeca originated in a conference, "Greek (Hi)stories through the Lens: Photographs, Photographers and their Testimonies," that took place in 2011 at the Centre for Hellenic Studies, King's College London. The editors' introduction lays out the broad parameters of the volume: "with a few notable exceptions … most work on the photography of and in Greece to date has avoided explicit theorization and reflection on its ontological, epistemological, and political work and impact. One of the aims of this volume is to fill this lacuna" (7). The scope of the essays, then, is admirably broad. Art historian John Tagg coined the useful plural term photographies to denote the many ways photographic images constitute their subject (Tagg 1988), and the term certainly applies here. The subject of "photography and Greece, photography of Greece" is nothing if not capacious (3). Within its [End Page 244] photographies, some key themes reappear in multiple guises, principally the relation, or tension, between ancient Greece and the modern nation. There are few, if any, countries other than Greece that are so constantly being compared to their distant past. To quote the title of a book by the eminent classicist Peter Green, "the shadow of the Parthenon" still spreads over Greece (Green 1972). There exists a similar interplay between urban and rural scenes. The city, particularly (but not exclusively) Athens, is identified with progress and modernization, while the countryside, whether on the mainland or on the islands, is home to a population of farmers and shepherds, who collectively exemplify traditional values and customs. In the photographs, too, one finds a divergence between emotively picturesque views and the more analytic, archaeological, or ethnographic studies. The essays in Camera Graeca are grouped into four sections, which treat, respectively, (1) the formation of Greek national identity, (2) photographic narratives, (3) photographic materiality and photographs as propaganda, and (4) vernacular photography. Of course, all such large categories are permeable, allowing for multiple approaches to the same topic and considerable cross-referencing. The essays do show the inevitable unevenness that reflects their origin in a conference, but the general quality is quite high. If I had to voice one general reservation, it is that on a number of occasions some of the authors strain to invest a relatively limited subject with a significance it does not warrant, often by applying inflated theoretical terminology. I have to make the customary but honest disclaimer that I harbor no antagonism toward theory, but I admit that I have little tolerance for neologisms like deterritorialization, self-interpellation, and intersubjective linkages (and still less tolerance for solecisms like archetypical, which are fortunately infrequent). In what follows, I will provide a brief summary of each essay and will attempt to summarize some of the most significant issues and contributions. The Greek victory over the Ottomans in the War of Independence (1832) preceded by only a few years the invention of photography (1839). The first five essays in Camera Graeca explore some instances, both nineteenth- and twentieth-century, of the medium's deployment in the process of establishing Greek national identity. John Stathatos examines how photography was used after the War of Independence, and again during the Balkan Wars of 1912-1913, and even during the hardship that followed the Second World War, to buttress Greek claims of national unity. Depictions of landscapes and monuments as well as portraits and costume studies could all serve to reinforce ideological claims of ethnic solidarity and historical continuity. At the outset of Alexandra Moschovi's contribution, she quotes from a 1941 volume, This Is Greece, [End Page 245] written and photographically illustrated by two scholars from the American School of Classical Studies at Athens (Frantz and Talcott 1941). They wished to encourage foreign aid to Greece, and their introduction contains the telling assertion that "in Greece past and present [are] separated by no...

The Deconstructivist Laclau

The Deconstructivist Laclau Paula Biglieri (bio) and Gustavo Guille (bio) Ernesto Laclau (1935–2014) became famous within the academic field when he published, together with Chantal Mouffe, Hegemony and Socialist Strategy: Towards a Radical Democratic Politics in 1985. This text brought fresh air into the field of radical politics not only because it challenged the overwhelming number of conservatives who were currently delighted in celebrating the failure of the socialist project, and thus the unsuccessfulness of Marxist theory, but also because this theoretical intervention made a difference: it reoriented the political leftist debates that, up until then, had been at an impasse. This theoretical intervention was later designated as the starting point of post-Marxism. Laclau was therefore characterized as a post-Marxist thinker, or as the creator of a new kind of theory of hegemony. However, he was never introduced as a “decontructivist” author. This is quite peculiar if we consider that in Hegemony and Socialist Strategy, in an enormous gesture—which could be interpreted as a work about their Marxist heritage—the authors deconstructed Marxist theory in such a vast way that they ended up disintegrating its foundations. Once they recognized that antagonism inhabits the heart of the subject and any objectivity, the assertion that there could be a final, coherent resolution without any remainder proved absurd. Thus they affirmed that enigmatic phrase “society is impossible”—a metaphor to say that society lacks the ultimate foundations from [End Page 1] which the totality of a partial process could be established. The inevitable conclusion was that it is no longer possible to hold on to a view that the subject of history could be determined a priori (the proletariat) and that it has a preestablished destiny (the reconciled society of communism). Yet the authors persisted with the idea of social change and antagonism, but this time without any possibility of reaching a dialectical resolution. Moreover, they insisted on the idea of emancipation, which would become a plural term—emancipations—leaving aside any possibility of an eschatological ending. From then onward, and taking into account these elements of perseverance, Laclau’s theoretical and political target became to make politics thinkable again. Politics—or, better said, hegemony—as the form of the political, antagonism, dislocation, and his last response to think of politics, that is, populism, became a key concept of his theoretical development. We could say that Laclau had a “political thought,” in order to contrast with the idea that his work was a “political philosophy,” in the sense that Laclau would have never accepted that politics was a mere sub-system of philosophy, that is to say, that politics would just refer to the institutionalized forms of interchange. For Laclau, politics went far beyond that; there was also “the political,” which had an entirely decisive dimension. In this sense, Laclau’s perspective is close to Derridean deconstruction inasmuch as Derrida always questioned the limits established by political philosophy and political theory regarding what has to be examined and what not as politics. As Ana Penchaszadeh and Emmanuel Biset have written: “Deconstruction questions the disciplinary boundaries that make political philosophy a defined area within philosophy, with a clear object to be examined and also a clear and distinct concept of politics” (2013, 10). In any case, the deconstructivist Laclau did not finish his task once he had deconstructed Marxist theory. We can say, in a way, that he continued with a deconstructivist gesture over his entire work, even when he presented his notion of populism. It is worth mentioning that in Laclau’s work the deconstructive face is [End Page 2] characterized by a critical or destructive aspect, while when constructing his theoretical and political proposal the deconstructive face is supplemented by psychoanalysis (in its Freudian-Lacanian version). In this article we will only focus on his deconstructivist gesture, which can be divided into two key moments: first, the deconstruction of classical Marxist theory and the radicalization of Antonio Gramsci’s notion of hegemony; and second, the deconstruction of the idea of populism and its radicalization. The Deconstruction of Classical Marxism Deconstruction, at least as developed by Derrida, is closely linked to the work of revisiting the Western philosophical tradition...

"Kangaroo generations": New contexts, new experiences

Abstract The aim of the article is to discuss academic productions published over the last 25 years regarding the transition to adulthood and focusing on the "Kangaroo generation". We found that these studies managed to recognize the pluralization and the single character of the transition to adulthood, with the parent-child living together, which is not necessarily associated with a dysfunctional character. We believe that the kangaroo family is a possible domestic arrangement that does not necessarily set doubts about the adult condition of the children. We propose the plural term "kangaroo generations" with the purpose of broadening the meaning of cohabitation between parents and children during the "mature stage" of the family life cycle. In addition, we consider that the level of knowledge derived from these studies cannot bring us satisfying notions of what it means to be an adult in the contemporary world and the notion of adulthood lacks revision, which makes further studies necessary.

Literature and Photography in Transition, 1850–1915 by Owen Clayton

Reviewed by: Literature and Photography in Transition, 1850–1915 by Owen Clayton Paul Baggett (bio) Literature and Photography in Transition, 1850–1915, by Owen Clayton. New York: Palgrave, Macmillan, 2015. ix + 233 pp. Cloth, $95.00; Paper, $90.00; Ebook, $74.99. Readers of Studies in American Naturalism will find Owen Clayton's Literature and Photography in Transition, 1850–1915 appealing not only for those chapters devoted to William Dean Howells's and Jack London's relationship to photography, and in London's case, to early cinema, but more broadly, for the remarkable sensitivity Clayton brings to the development of visual culture over the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. According to Clayton, scholars have too often reduced the history of technological innovation in photography and early film to a simple, linear evolution. This conventional historical trajectory begins in the 1820s and 1830s, with Nicéphore Niépce and (more famously) Louis Daguerre's development of the silver-plate daguerreotype and William Henry Fox Talbot's paper calo-type; progresses to the 1850s, when Frederick Scott Archer developed the collodion or wet plate process; and culminates with Charles Bennett's introduction of gelatin emulsion or dry plate in the 1870s. Gelatin emulsion then facilitated George Eastman's invention of roll film and his introduction of the mobile Kodak camera; which led to William Dickson and Thomas Edison's invention of the kinetograph camera; and eventually resulted in the kinetoscope, that turn-of-the-century, moving-picture device through which one could view spectacles such as bodybuilder Eugene Sandow's muscle displays or actress Annabelle Moore's serpentine dance. [End Page 84] While this may appear an acceptable description of photographic and early cinematic history, Clayton contends that it glosses over a more complicated story, ignoring not only the co-existing, often competing, photographic technologies of this period, but also the varying aesthetic goals of those who integrated visual images into their works of fiction and nonfiction. Clayton thus highlights photography's transitional status over the sixty-five year period he discusses. Building on work by Daniel Novak and John Tagg, Clayton prefers the plural term "photographies" when referring to the developments of nineteenth-century visual culture to reflect its heterogeneity and its methods of production. Providing us a transatlantic study beginning in 1850 and ending during the momentous years before cinema becomes a dominant cultural medium, Clayton fills a significant gap in scholarship, not only by identifying the dynamic relationship between literature and photography in the works of Henry Mayhew, Robert Lewis Stevenson, Amy Levy, William Dean Howells, and Jack London, but also by attending to how these authors negotiated the different technologies available to them. As his earliest example of photography's transitional status, Clayton focuses on Henry Mayhew's Labour and the London Poor (1850–62). Originally published as a series of investigative articles about the city's poor, Labour and the London Poor documents the lives of various sellers, scavengers, and entertainers working in London's streets, from Charles Alloway, a crippled seller of nutmeg-graters, to "Old Sarah," a blind, hurdy-gurdy player. Clayton is most interested in the hybrid, daguerreotype engravings of these various characters. While many have disregarded these images, Clayton approaches them as a cultural materialist, drawing insights into their production, composition, and reception. He considers, for instance, why Mayhew chose daguerreotype photographs, which he could only reproduce from silver plates to paper by wood engravings, unlike calotype images, which he could have produced directly onto iodized paper. But while calotypes may have been easier to reproduce, they lacked the clarity and dimension of daguerreotypes. Clayton explains that such qualities were important to Mayhew, who approached his subjects much like the scientists of his generation, gathering empirical evidence through disinterested observation and rendering them with the highest degree of objective accuracy possible with the tools available to him. But Clayton also argues that while his images often seem to reduce his subjects to a series of "types," Mayhew nonetheless tries to preserve their individuality by investing them with a "picturesque nobility," an aesthetic standard best achieved [End Page 85] through engraving. Clayton highlights more subtle details of these hybrid images to demonstrate how Mayhew...

Untyped Pluralism

In the semantic debate about plurals, pluralism is the view that a plural term denotes some things in the domain of quantification and a plural predicate denotes a plural property, that is, a property that can be instantiated by many things jointly. According to a particular version of this view, untyped pluralism, there is no type distinction between objects and properties. In this article, I argue against untyped pluralism by showing that it is subject to a variant of a Russell-style argument put forth by Timothy Williamson and that it clashes with a plural version of Cantor’s theorem. I conclude that pluralists should postulate a type distinction between objects and properties.

Laws, Lawyers and Texts: Studies in Medieval Legal History in Honour of Paul Brand by Susanne Jenks, Jonathon Rose, and Christopher Whittick (review)

Reviewed by: Laws, Lawyers and Texts: Studies in Medieval Legal History in Honour of Paul Brand by Susanne Jenks, Jonathon Rose, and Christopher Whittick Jason Taliadoros Jenks, Susanne, Jonathon Rose, and Christopher Whittick , eds, Laws, Lawyers and Texts: Studies in Medieval Legal History in Honour of Paul Brand (Medieval Law and its Practice, 13), Leiden, Brill, 2002; hardback; pp. xxii, 416; 1 colour plate, 3 b/w illustrations; R.R.P. €164.00; ISBN 9789004212480. This volume is both a worthy tribute to the person it honours, Professor Paul Brand, formerly of All Souls, Oxford, and recently visiting Professor in the University of Michigan Law School, and a significant contribution in its own right to the areas of research made possible by Brand's scholarship. As the Encomium by Barbara Harvey indicates, Brand's area of interest was the 'long' thirteenth century from the limit of legal memory in 1189 to the death of Edward I in 1307. In particular, Brand is perhaps best known for his 'authoritative account of the development of the legal profession' (p. xii) in England and the origins of the common law in the era of Henry II. His scholarship is characterised by its use of unpublished and manuscript material, evidenced in his role as editor of four volumes of the Law Reports for the Selden Society. A series of chapters add nuance and complexity to Brand's account of the early legal profession. Sandra Raban's study reveals more information about the individuals and institutions that retained lawyers during the reign of Edward I (1272-1307), shifting the traditional focus (adopted by Brand) away 'from the vantage point of the lawyers themselves' (p. 201). Charles Donahue, Jr applies Brand's definition of what constitutes a 'profession' to the fourteenth century and concludes that the plural term 'professions' is more apposite to describe each of the variegated groups that constituted the common lawyers and canon lawyers who plied their business in that time. David Crook's chapter focuses on a senior justice of the bench from the mid-thirteenth-century, Robert of Lexington: his lack of legal training and longevity at the bench suggest a counterpoint to Brand's depiction of a professionally trained profession. Several papers add detail to the 'Angevin legal revolution' that gave rise to the common law in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries (p. 51), a phenomenon for which Brand has proffered compelling evidence starting with his 1990 article 'Multis Vigiliis Excogitatem et Inventam' in the Haskins Society Journal. John Hudson's study suggests that the infamous clause 3 of the Constitutions of Clarendon (1164), dealing with criminous clerks, not only formed a platform for dispute between the King and his famous archbishop, Thomas Becket, but was also a central part of Henry II's legal reforms that sought to channel legal business into the King's court, via the chief justiciar. This subtlety is missing from Brand's account. In a different vein, Sarah Tullis takes the Glanvill treatise, 'the first detailed exposition of the English common law' (p. 327), and traces its afterlife in early modern [End Page 202] England and colonial America as a vehicle for political polemics. In typically iconoclastic yet rigorous manner, Paul Hyams tackles the reasons for the 'technical discourse' (p. 21) that characterised the common law in its origins (and remains today), tracing linguistic depictions of land tenure (the 'fief ') from its origins in 1066 as personal bonds to 1230 when it came to represent what we now understand as 'ownership'. Running through several chapters in this collection is a theme that the 'learned law' (Roman and canon law) played a part in the development of the early common law - a contribution hinted at in Brand's work. Bruce O'Brien points to the continuing use of 'conquest-era' legal texts in the second half of the twelfth century and beyond, as exemplified in the Holkham lawbook, a legal encyclopaedia containing material from both Roman law and Saxon codes. David Ibbetson and Richard Helmholz also emphasise the possible influence of Roman and canon law on particular English common law writs, in their studies of the historical development of annuities and rights of re-entry...

What is water? A normative perspective

In the modernist era, water is discussed as a single substance which has multiple uses. I argue that from a normative perspective water should be discussed in the plural term (‘waters’), as they constitute a variety of ‘things’ with a similar chemical composition. Waters are composed of multiple ‘needs’, which are uses with a normative rationale, and of ‘wants’, which are desires that should be seen as economic demands. Moreover, waters should also be differentiated by source: natural, recycled or produced. This new language of water has direct policy implications. Needs, differentiated into direct human needs, spiritual needs, environmental needs and community needs, which may be prioritized, should be supplied regardless of cost considerations. ‘Wants’ and produced water should be priced at the full social cost of supply. Hence, while the rates at which needs are supplied should be determined by affordability, regardless of spatial differentiation in supply cost, the pricing of water supplied for ‘wants’ will vary over space. Thus water which is supplied through the same pipe to the same house may be subject to different pricing logics. However, there are many nuances to these generalizations, which have still to be fleshed out.

THE UNIVERSE AMONG OTHER THINGS

AbstractPeter Simons has argued that the expression ‘the universe’ is not a genuine singular term: it can name neither a single, completely encompassing individual, nor a collection of individuals. (It is, rather, a semantically plural term standing equally for every existing object.) I offer reasons for resisting Simons's arguments on both scores.

Multigrade Predicates

The history of the idea of predicate is the history of its emancipation. The lesson of this paper is that there are two more steps to take. The first is to recognize that predicates need not have a fixed degree, the second that they can combine with plural terms. We begin by articulating the notion of a multigrade predicate: one that takes variably many arguments. We counter objections to the very idea posed by Peirce, Dummett's Frege, and Strawson. We show that the arguments of a multigrade predicate must be grouped into places, with perhaps several arguments occupying positions at a place. Variability may relate to places or positions. Russell's multiple judgement predicate turns out to be just one example of a family—‘is necessarily true of’, ‘is said of’, ‘is instantiated by’ and so on—of predicates with variably many places. Our main concern, however, is lists. Any adequate account of lists must include plural as well as singular terms. On one account, lists are mere strings of separate arguments, which occupy variably many positions within a place of a multigrade predicate. A quite different account takes the list itself to be a compound plural term. We compare these rival conceptions, and reach some surprising conclusions. As a coda, we deploy the conceptual apparatus developed in the paper to assess Morton's pioneer system of multigrade logic.

The Quantificational Function of the Japanese Numeral Classifier

This paper presents a new quantificational analysis of the Japanese numeral quantifier (NQ) construction. It is proposed that the classifier within the NQ functions as the domain of quantification for the numeral, denoting a set of atomic individuals. This accounts for the predominant distributive reading of the floating NQ sentence, both with object classifiers and event classifiers, as a direct consequence of the atomicity condition of the classifier denotation. The analysis correctly predicts that, unlike the floating NQ, the non-floating NQ will show a collective/distributive ambiguity because it forms a plural term, which can always be interpreted as a group individual or as a sum of individuals. The analysis also provides a semantic account of the well-known classifier-NP agreement phenomenon.

The Universe

AbstractIt is often said by philosophers that the term ‘the universe’ is illegitimate, whether because the notion of ‘all things’ is incoherent, or inconsistent, or cannot even be meaningfully expressed. The reasons may be drawn from metaphysics, or logic, or the philosophy of language, or the philosophy of mathematics. In this essay I argue that the term is legitimate, withstanding all criticisms, and that there is a single best meaning for it, which is that it is a semantically plural term standing equally for every existing object. ‘Forty‐two’, said Deep Thought, with infinite majesty and calm.(Douglas Adams, The Hitch‐Hiker's Guide to the Galaxy)

224 Advanced Benchmarking を利用した DEA 時系列分析手法に関する研究

In this paper, the mehtodology of DEA-PAB (Plural term Analysis under the condition of Advanced Benchmarking included) is proposed. Developing the DEA-PAB Methodology, firstly, the Advanced Benchmarking which consist of the best result of each Evaluating Item is constructed. It will be the key DMU towards aiming number one Efficiency Level in the entire DMUs during analyzing period. Secondly, basic model to figure out DEA in the plural term including Advanced Benchmarking is proposed. Analyzing the Efficiency Level of the DMU in plural terms, the DEA-PAB Methodology is applied, using the actual data of Production Control Functional Indicators of nine Production Bases. After achieving equal to Existing Benchmarking, improvement room for the Each Evaluating Item by Plant, to achieve the number one Efficiency Level in the entire DMUs is stated.