These people were Edmund Husserl and Martin Heidegger. There is also another important person in the subject of hermeneutics, of which we have failed to include in our presentation and he is Paul Ricoeur. Edmund Husserl is often referred to as the father of phenomenology. He focused more on epistemological question of the relationship between the knower and the object of the study. During 1927, Edmund Husserl sought a new way to understand reality that could be more comprehensive and more reliable than any that had been proposed up to that point.
She suspects then Valerius of using allusion: “That would fall under Genette’s intertextual subcategory, “allusion,” engagement with another text that needs to be recognized by the reader in order for a text to have its full meaning.”(Welch 2013) Bloomer offered one of the explanations for the question “Why did Valerius have to use allusion for a well-known fact?” Bloomer claims that Valerius relied on the structure of the paragraph offered by Cicero. In addition, Valerius utilizes diction and writing style of Livy in some of his stories. The story under analysis, however, almost completely repeats Livy’s diction. That, according to Bloomer, who was quoted by Welch, was probably comfortable for Valerius to use some phrases from Livy. A conventional system would probably call this “borrowing” plagiarism, yet Welch uses another approach- she claims what Valerius did is “allusion”, not plagiarism.
He argues that the different paths taken by each of the Hamilton’s essentially creates no contribution to the overall message of the story. In the making of this novel, Steinbeck even said “It’s a kind of sloppy sounding book”, which Lisca quotes in his article. However, Steinbeck goes on to say “but it is not sloppy really”. The variance of perspectives throughout East of Eden and the ‘sloppiness’ that is described can be looked at as a unique sort of structure. The Trasks and the Hamiltons both portray different sides to a story, and each presence contributes to the overall discussion.
He has not observed every Spanglish-speaker in the world and as mentioned, he does not use statistics to convince the reader. So why do we even believe him? Firstly, the appeal form pathos allows us to sympathise with him. Secondly, we know that he teaches other people about the language, and we know that he has written a book about the subject. Therefore, he must have some form of authority.
That is to say, new historicism refuses to ‘privilege’ the literary text, instead of a literary ‘foreground’ and a historical ‘background’ it envisages and practices a mode of study in which literary and non-literary works are given equal weight and constantly inform or interrogate each other. This ‘equal weighting’ is proposed in the definition of new historicism offered by the American critics Louis Montrose who defines it as a combined interest in ‘the textuality of history, the historicity of texts’. It involves ‘an intensified willingness to read all the textual traces of the past with the attention traditionally conferred only on literary texts’. Many Indian English writers have turned to the past as much to trace the deepening attitude of nationalism so as to cherish the memories of the bygone days. Ghosh’s concept of history colours all his writing.
In order to have a better more accurate account of the massive changes and new ideas that have emanated from this period it is of importance to go back in history and trace the roots of the Bauhaus period. “The history of the Bauhaus is a long story, an endless one I could never reach the end; I have merely traced one strand” – Oskar Schlemmer (Naylor,1985: 9). The Bauhaus school, which can be translated ”to house of building”, was established in April 1919, by architect Walter Gropius. The Bauhaus School, served as a training institute for designers to create designs inspired by the Art and Crafts movement of the nineteenth century which strove for individualization but also unite manufacturing and creativity. Therefore establishing designers as craftsmen.
From someone who makes his living using words, I found it sloppy and annoying. From a purely factual point of view, there is not a lot of new information in this book. Most of the content could be gleaned from previously-published sources–interviews, match reports, ect.—and there are some passages where the reader feels doubtful that the way the author relates an anecdote is really quite how it occurred. The strength of the book lies in the direct quotes from interviews Balague conducted with Pep’s friends, colleagues and players (including one who preferred to remain anonymous–for some reason I suspect it was Dani
More importantly, it will account for the author’s worldview, as well as for his misconceptions, errors, and biases. Such are the objectives of this first chapter. One can trace treatises on politics and diplomacy as early as antiquity and to choose from the many existing theories for both disciplines is no easy task. For example, to start with politics, Aristotle’s composed his essay Politics, a Treatise on Government in the fourth century BC. In turn, some renowned scholars such as David Reynolds traced back diplomacy to the Bronze Age.
It is he who stands as specimen of the ostracized character. Character-sketches are introduced through essays in the beginning of 17th century by Hall, Overbury and Earle. They imitated the Greek philosophers such as Theophrastus and the Roman Seneca. In the modern novels the characterisation came as representing not much about the behaviour but mostly by analyzing the consciousness of the character. Henry James (1843-1916) was a pioneer in showing the consciousness as center of the
LITERATURE REVIEW 1. METAPHOR Over the years scholars have studied the nature of metaphors from different perspectives and today it is a primary object of linguists, who research and investigate its role in nowadays language. The first ones who had shown a great interest in studying it were philosophers. In A Universal Approach to Metaphors, Lin Ma (2008) states that according to philosophers literal speech was thought to be the vital part of a language whereas a metaphor is only an aberration or a device to make the discourse more persuasive or embellished. Despite that, from the time of Shakespeare metaphors are used in poetry, literature, music and spoken language until this day.