Charles Dickens＇Humanitarianism and Its Reflection in David Copperfield     

马文婷 《读与写:教育教学刊》2010,7(6):16-16,30

  相似文献   

霍尔顿:道德自我分裂及其生命悲剧     

杜璇 《黄山学院学报》2012,(1):76-80

杰罗姆·戴维·塞林格的小说致力于探索现代社会的特征和现代人类的真实生存境况;从不同的角度揭示出了个人生存窘境和个体悲剧命运的必然性。将作品的阐释和人类的生存思考融为一体,应用查尔斯.泰勒的自我理论,来解读塞林格的成名作《麦田里的守望者》以及对人类道德信仰危机的焦虑和隐忧;分析主人翁霍尔顿的道德自我的组成因素和内在矛盾以及道德自我的分裂以何种方式影响了霍尔顿的人生选择,以至于进一步导致了他的生命悲剧。  相似文献   

Developmental characteristics in judgments of emotion from nonverbal vocal cues     

David Matsumoto 《Int J Intercult Relat》1983,7(4):415-424

In an exploratory study on the developmental trends in judgments of emotion from nonverbal vocal cues, content free speech tapes designed to express one of the four emotions of happiness, surprise, sadness, and anger were presented to 47 American and 56 Japanese children, ages 4 through 9. The children indicated which emotion they thought was expressed by selecting a color photograph depicting one of the four emotions from a small group of photographs. Four- and 5-year-old American children were able to identify the emotion surprise, while American children 6 through 9 correctly identified all four emotions. Four- and 5-year-old Japanese children, on the other hand, were able to identify both surprise and sadness, while 6-year-olds correctly identified happiness, surprise, and sadness. Japanese children aged 7 through 9 were able to identify all four emotions. The results supported the concept of increasing decoding ability with increasing age across cultures, but also provided evidence for culture bound differences in growth of nonverbal emotional sensitivity  相似文献   

Philosophical skepticism not relativism is the problem with the Strong Programme in Science Studies and with Educational Constructivism     

Dimitris P. Papayannakos 《Science & Education》2008,17(6):573-611

The structure of David’s Bloor argument for the Strong Programme (SP) in Science Studies is criticized from the philosophical perspective of anti-skeptical, scientific realism. The paper transforms the common criticism of SP—that the symmetry principle of SP implies an untenable form of cognitive relativism—into the␣clear philosophical issue of naturalism versus Platonism. It is also argued that the concrete patterns of SP’s interest-explanations and its sociological definition of knowledge involve philosophical skepticism. It is claimed, then, that the most problematic elements of SP reside primarily in philosophical skepticism. It is also claimed that this sort of criticism can be directed against other more radical, versions of constructivism in science and science education studies.  相似文献   

从译者主体性浅析David Copperfield两个中译本     

徐晶 《考试周刊》2010,(25):26-27

作为翻译的主体,译者主观能动地跳出语言层面的束缚。结合译入语语言文化背景,对原作的内容含义和文化精神进行再创作。在文学翻译中,译者主体性表现得更为突出。对语言形式的叛逆是为了达到功能对等,是为了更好地忠实于原文。本文将通过对David Copperfiel两个中译本的浅析,分析译者主体性在文学翻译中的体现及所取得的效果。  相似文献   

国内黄哲伦戏剧研究综述     

宋艳莉 《湘南学院学报》2015,(1):77-80

黄哲伦(David Henry Hwang)是美国当代著名的华裔剧作家。《蝴蝶君》一剧让他声名大噪,并确立了他在戏剧界的地位,同时他也因此剧受到了国内学者的关注。从2000年国内就开始有了关于他的研究,并且研究数量逐年增加,其中不乏一些值得重视的观点。但是笔者经总结发现,关于黄哲伦的研究主要集中于他的《蝴蝶君》上,其他作品研究相对较少,内容主要集中于对其写作主题及思想的研究。本文通过对国内这一领域的研究现状与研究特点进行考察,试图发现我国对黄哲伦研究在理论方法、研究视角与关注侧重等方面呈现出的特点,以及存在的不足并找出新的研究空间。  相似文献   

论《蝴蝶君》的雌雄同体     

宁显锦 《乐山师范学院学报》2014,(6):34-37

《蝴蝶君》的人物身上性别模糊和雌雄同体特征明显,这些雌雄同体特征也是决定人物各自命运的关键。强烈的性别意识和对立导致了剧中人物无法达到两性的和谐。文章以弗吉尼亚·吴尔夫在《一间自己的房间》里提出的"雌雄同体"概念中的三个特征:男性化的女人与女性化的男人、性别意识和两性和谐来分析《蝴蝶君》以及作者黄哲伦残缺的雌雄同体观。  相似文献   

帕金翰"超越保护主义"媒介教育观点解读   总被引：4，自引：0，他引：4  

秦学智 《比较教育研究》2006,27(8):49-53

本文对代表当今世界最先进的媒介教育理念的英国当代媒介教育家大卫·帕金翰的"超越保护主义"观点进行解读,对英国媒介教育阶段变化的原因进行探究,以探寻该观点产生的历史背景、意义、深层次原因及其本质,为中国特色的媒介教育理论研究与具体实践提供有益的借鉴.  相似文献   

Collingridge and the dilemma of control: Towards responsible and accountable innovation   总被引：1，自引：0，他引：1  

Audley Genus  Andy Stirling 《Research Policy》2018,47(1):61-69

The paper critically reviews the work of David Collingridge in the light of contemporary concerns about responsibility and accountability in innovation, public engagement with science and technology, and the role of scientific expertise in technology policy. Given continued interest in his thoughts on the ‘social control of technology’, and the ‘dilemma of control’, this attention is both timely and overdue. The paper illuminates a mismatch between the prevalence of citations to Collingridge’s work on the dilemma of control in the literature on responsible innovation, and the depth of engagement with his arguments. By considering neglected aspects of Collingridge’s substantive, methodological and philosophical analysis, important implications can be drawn for theory and practice relating to the governance of innovation and co-evolution between technology and society. The paper helps to improve understandings of wider political contexts for responsible innovation, especially in relation to anticipatory, participatory and institutional aspects of governance.  相似文献