Persulphate and Potassium Iodide Essay Example for Free

Persulphate and Potassium Iodide EssayThe rate of which the answer happened mass be found out by using the simple formulae Speed = Distance Time Distance is what we call the persulphate because we are measuring the amount of persulphate needed to react. The amount of persulphate will always be the same at the end so it doesnt matter how much we use. So to come upon it easy we can call this 1 (unit). Therefore Rate = 1 Time Therefore rate is the inverse of while and we can draw a graph of this. The faster the rate of reaction ascertains place, the shorter is the time needed for the reaction to finish.To be more precise, the speed of the reaction is inversely proportional to the time taken for the reaction to finish. In my prediction I stated, I predict that when the assimilation of the reactant, Potassium Persulphate, is increased while all other factors are kept regular then the rate of reaction will increase. From the graph we can clear see that this is the case. At 5% concentration the rate of reaction is very slow as it takes 720. 29 seconds for the cross to disappear but at speed of light% concentration the rate of reaction has increased dramatically and is very fast, taking only 16.12 seconds for the cross to disappear. From my predicted graph, we can see that it is very similar to that of the demonstrable graph and therefore my prediction has been supported by the experiment. In this experiment only one concentration was altered. A variation is to keep the concentration of iodide constant and alter the concentration of Potassium persulphate. Then the speed of the reaction is found to be proportional to the concentration of the Persulphate. If the Persulphate concentration is doubled then the speed doubles. The origin for this is that the ions are closer together in a concentrated solution.The closer together they are, the more often the ions collide. The more often they collide, the more chance they make up of reacting. Collision Theory f or Rates of answer Before looking at the factors that can alter the rate of reaction, we must consider when happens when a reaction takes place. first-year of all, the particles of the reacting nerves must collide with each other and, secondly, a fixed amount of energy called the activation energy must be reached if the reaction is to take place.If a hitting between particles can produce sufficient energy (i. e.if they collide fast enough and in the right direction) a reaction will take place. Not all collisions will result in a reaction. A reaction is speeded up if the number of suitable collisions is increased. Effect of Temperature on the Rate of reaction When one of the reactants is a solid, the reaction must take place on the get up of the solid. By breaking up the solid in to smaller pieces, the surface are is increased, giving a greater area for collisions to take place and so causing and increase in the rate of reaction. This explains why mixtures of coal trunk and a ir can cause explosions.The experiment was done on the same day trying to keep the temperature the same. Effect of baseless on the Rate of Reaction The rates of some reactions are increased by exposure to light. Light has a similar effect, therefore, to increasing temperature. This is why the paper had to be used. Effect of niggardness on the Rate of Reaction The more concentrated the reactants, the greater will be the rate of reaction. This is because increasing the concentration of the reactants increases the number of collisions between particles and therefore, increases the rate of reaction.This overly explains why the greatest rate of reaction are usually as soon as the reactants are mixed i. e. they are both at their highest concentrations. As the reaction precedes the concentrations of the reacting substances decrease and the rate of reaction decreases. The effect of concentration is shown in this experiment using potassium persulphate and Iodine showing a colour transpor t and cloudiness due to the precipitation of potassium. Effect of Light on the Rate of Reaction The rates of some reactions are increased by exposure to light. Light has a similar effect, therefore, to increasing temperature.Thats why paper is used to surround the beaker. Effect of Catalysts on the Rate of Reaction A catalyse is a substance which can alter the rate of a reaction but remains chemically unchanged at the end of the reaction. Catalysts usually speed up reactions. A catalyst, which slows down a reaction, is called a negative catalyst or inhibitor. Catalysts speed up reactions by providing an alternative pathway for the reaction, i. e. one that has much lower activation energy. More collisions will, therefore, have enough energy for this new pathway.So the factors, which affect the rate of a chemical reaction, include 7. Concentration 8. Particle Size 9. insistence (for reactions involving gases) 10. Temperature 11. Light 12. Presence of a catalyst The difference in the rate of reaction can be explained in terms of a simple collision theory. Evaluation The number used wasnt the most entire procedure but it was good enough to give us firm enough results and conclusion. The experiment shows a reasonably high accuracy of results to a hundredth of a second. Although, when dealing with the solutions it was taken to the nearest cm3.This was because we only had equipment to this degree although it was good enough to give accurate results. The experiment has shown to produce no anomalous results. As you can see from the graph that all the results follow the line of best fit and none be out of place. I think the experiment shows quite a high standard of reliability. The preliminary experiment showed that the right amount of starch was used and hitherto when repeated no anomalies were found. I can say therefore from this that I can support a firm conclusion. There are only a few things that could produce anomalous results.If the constants were not kept c onstant then this may produce some misleading results. This was done as best of our abilities although if a different batch of starch was used through the experiment this would produce inaccurate times also if the pipettes were accidentally mixed up or the observer of the cross changed or stopped the clock not as accurately as before. The number of results taken from the experiment though was a suitable number, although to make it a lot more accurate the results could have been repeated 3 times and then an average taken, although this would take a long time.This experiment has shown to be very suitable for its purpose and given some accurate and reliable results. If, for any instance, it was necessary to have extremely high accurate results the experimental procedure may have to be changed. If this experiment were to be changed in any way it would only be to do more repeat readings and measure and time more accurately this then would give more accurate results. Improvements outside the school laboratories, with this experiment, can be changed by using very accurate equipment. retention all things, which affect the rate of reaction constant, for example light and temperature. If done in a cabinet with a thermometer and light sensor these two things can be kept constant to a high degree. By observing a colour change can be improved by a colour detection sensor. Fresh solutions in apparatus, which is cleaned thoroughly after use an also using a photocell linked into a clock quite an than the visual way These differences can produce some very highly precise results. Chemistry Scientific Investigation.

Media Violence and Children Essay Example for Free

Media Violence and Children EssayYour children atomic number 18 surrounded by forcefulness. From video games and television to the news itself, bloodshed is everywhere. Many parents and educators vexation that force play seen on the media will at the very least desensitize children, and that it may even make children more likely to commit atrocities themselves. Other lot claim the violence seen on the media is not real(a), and that children understand this. So whos right? In order to better understand this crucial issue, we need to examine the level of violence in entertainment as well as revelations made possible by modern science. Violence in entertainment is not new. until now in ancient Rome, people gathered to watch gladiators. In gladiator combats, two trained men (usu eachy criminals or slaves) would fight each other in front of a cheering crowd. Some epochs, men would also be forced to fight wild animals. These shows were incredibly popular in order to accommodate the big masses of people eager to watch the combat, Roman officials built the Colosseum, which could seat 50,000 spectators, in 80 CE. The opening of the Colosseum was celebrated with 100 days of games, during which thousands of men and animals were earnestly injured or killed.Long before children watched cutthroat cartoons, they listened to violent stories. Even our most cherished coffin nail tales often contain bloodshed. In fact, modern reading materials of fairy tales tend to be a lot less violent than the originals. For example, in Hans Christen Andersons The Little Mermaid, the little mermaid has her tongue cut out, almost stabs her prince, and dies Disneys famous version of this classic tale is significantly happier and less violent. But why is violence such a popular form of entertainment? There are several(prenominal) possible answers, and they are probably all true to some extent.People like ceremonial violence because it is, at least to some degree, forbidden all f unctioning societies need to have laws against murder. Seeing other peoples pain also makes your own problems seem insignificant. Finally, some violence in the media was meant to teach a unimaginative lesson. Many gladiators were condemned criminals, so their violent and entertaining death served as a warning against would-be criminals. Public executions have served the same purpose throughout history. ottoman tales also warned children against the dangers of misbehaving.For example, the little mermaid disobeyed the rules of her father and her people, and she suffered as a result. Modern violence in the media is not that different from what occurred in the past. People enjoy watching violence because it is forbidden, distracting, and it can teach lessons about reality. At the same time, violence is becoming more and more prevalent. Additionally, much of the violence shown in video games, movies, and television is alone unrealistic real consequences are very rarely shown, especial ly in cartoons.As a result, the violence may be too glamorized to teach real life lessons. Even if violence does teach a morality lesson, children may still be blackballly affected. Vincent P. Mathews, a professor of radiology at atomic number 49 University School of Medicine, discovered that watching violence on the media might actually alter brain function. Functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) showed that watching violent images decreased frontal lobe brain activity in children whether or not they had previous problems of aggression. Decreased frontal lobe activity is associated with attention and self control problems. in like manner using fMRI, Klaus Mathiak at the University of Aachen in Germany discovered that playing violent video games and thinking about actually participating in real violent activities hit the same part of the brain. In other words, an individuals brain cannot distinguish between violent actions that are committed by the individual and violent ac tivities that are purely make believe. Additionally, violent video games may be training the brain for real life violent behavior. So what does all of this mean for parents?Children, like adults, are naturally drawn to violent images, and it is possible for children to learn valuable lessons from violent stories. However, exposure to too much violence, especially glamorized violence, probably does have a negative impact of children. Although more scientific research needs to be conducted before conclusive answers can be given, children may have a hard time distinguishing between real violence and fake violence, and simply watching violence may lead to increased behavioral problems. If you are worried that your children are watching too much violence, you should monitor exactly what they are watching.Movies and video games both have rating systems, and all televisions 13 inches or larger that were manufactured in the United States since January 2000 contain V chips. V chips allow pa rents to control what programs are watched, even when the children are unsupervised. You could also limit the amount of time that your children are allowed to evanesce watching television or playing video games, regardless of whether or not the programs or games contain violent content. Finally, you can discuss the reality of violence with you children to make sure that they can differentiate between make believe and reality.

Olafur Eliasson | Artist Biography

Olafur Eliasson Artist BiographyA general visit to an art gallery consists of being able to view a serial of objects hanging from the wall or placed upon a stand. However, Olafur Eliasson takes the role of seeing an object within a gallery lacuna to a whole sweet level. Eliasson creates what is known to be as installation art. This modern art form is described as an art function that must be walked through by the viewing interview to be able to experience it completely. Installation art is set up in a certain bea for a short period of succession and is preserved only through memory and photographs. Olafur believes that his calculate is non completed until the visitor may experience his or her subjective perception and mediation. Many of his plant life use the possessive pronoun your eg Your Sun Machine (1997, Marc Foxx Gallery), Your Natural Denudation Inverted (1999, Carnegie Museum of Art,), Your Black Horizon and Your space Embracer, (2004, West of Rome). With this, he is implying that the spectator must drive to the piece and make the connection as part of the aesthetics of the installation.I see potential in the spectator in the receiver, the reader, the participator, the witnesser, the user. Olafur Eliasson. To Eliasson, this is the perfect strategy to founder the viewer take part in individual awake(predicate)ness, reflect on the piece and meditate.Olafur Eliasson was born in Copenhagen, Denmark in 1967. He is Danish-Icelandic and is known to be wizard of the most famous contemporary artists of our time. His Icelandic nationality is the mold of his beguile. Icelands landscapes and Eliassions works atomic number 18 very similar aesthetically speaking in the sense that they both partake the same elements. He uses materials such as wind, light, and water (solid, fog, and ice) that are typical to that of Icelands landscape. Olafurs works have been known to mimic geniuss unique power. He studied at the Royal Danish Academy and majored i n Fine Arts. Eliasson created the Studio Olafur Eliasson in Berlin in 1995 he used this space for research and development. His early pieces were usually photographs of the Icelandic landscape which he later explains helped him have a financial role to support his future installations. Olafurs artwork mainly consists of geometric forms and analytical lines which enhance the space and light that is being used. Eliasson combines light, movement and color in his exhibitions along with the viewer. His work invites his audience to participate into the public realm where they may find their own moments of egotism disc everywherey.When I make something, which maybe is a work of art, I want this to be in the world. I want it to be sincerely and honestly and responsibly in the world. I want it to have an impact somehow.Eliasson explains his intentions for his artwork. As every artist should, they should feel like they would make a significant impact with the worlds. However, fleck doing re search, Ive noticed that Eliassons intention as an artist is to make space tangible. He creates playful works that demonstrate time and dimension. An example of this are his infamous brisk York City waterfalls. In these pieces he proves the time it takes for water to fall by placing such large artificial waterfalls in a large city such as New York. While the waterfalls represent time, ultimately, it is the viewer who can determine this depending on the distance and angle. Olafur creates a bridge to make his audience think close their surroundings, and how some objects and environments we perceive on a daily basis are usually seen to be self-evident. Eliassons work has also been known to mimic and recreate forces of nature and explore human perception. He does this while working with lights, shadows, stone, water, mist, or fog to create a specific environment. Eliasson feels that all these elements serve a purpose for his installations. For example, the undecomposable use of ligh t can cast a shadow upon a wall for the viewer and can project two-dimensional shapes on a snow-white wall which would create the illusion of a three-dimensional space.His work sometimes consist of horizon lines which not only are an example of mimicking nature, but also make the whole piece three-dimensional and give off a sense of confusion. Eliassion calls this illusory architecture which is when space creates an illusion, even though one is aware of the walls and space surrounding you. Some work that includes a lot of illusory architecture is the piece Take Your Time (2008) which fit the idea very well. The viewer feels as if they would like to inhabit the space for a while. The installation uses monofrequency lights to completely cover the room in shades of yellow and black and intimately involves its inhabitants. opposite room, Beauty (1993) consists of a dark room covered in black tiles where a mist falls from the pileus and creates a rainbow curtain to walk through. What s so spectacular about this piece is that its different every time and for every person. Upon visiting the installation, what one person sees as yellow, could be seen as violet for the other person no matter how close these two people may be, the outcome will constantly be different. With this piece, one can really translate that beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Another room invites you to completely immerse yourself within the color spectrum, 360 Room For All Colours (2002). The circular room blankets the audience with a display of light that race around the cylindrical wall. The colors overlap and create an endless amount of shades of color. The installation manages to rearrange your opthalmic senses from being dependant on ones vision until you realize that your other senses take part in enjoying the artwork. Thispiece covers the viewer with natures color palette, which is referencing to Eliassons photography from the Icelandic landscape.The go Project (2003) at Tate Mod ern Museum in London consists of a giant sun made of over 200 yellow lamps in a semi-circle reflected over mirrors on the ceiling. The mist that covers the museum is made up of water and sugar. The installation itself attracted over two million people whom would behave oddly in front of the ceiling mirrors. Eliasson described this works as seeing yourself seeing. This is one thing Ive noticed about Olafur Eliassons work, is that it evokes feelings and sensation. All art has a way with creating emotions. Within the functions of art, there is always a spirit. As a society, most people may appreciate photography or film more because we make connections and find it easier to relate to and were labored to see what the artist sees. This is why I think installation art is probably not recognized as much as photography within society. However, the function for art is solely to be art, otherwise, its just a design. Installations and exhibition art are meant to tell a story or evoke emotio n, which is what Eliassons work does in such a simple manner. The work of Olafur Eliasson has given people the idea to see double. He creates his installations with the intention of expressing vision through the audiences experience with spacial design. With this, the viewer is usually confused about his or her surroundings which may lead towards reflection on ones life.Olafur Eliassons work is known to be eccentric and has a geometric use of projections of light and mirrors, analytical lines and natural elements to confuse the viewers perception of place and oneself. Eliasson also creates a foreground sense in separately of his works. When Eliasson transforms a gallery into a space of nature, he creates a deep connection with space for the viewer that lets his or her think about their own senses and life. His work challenges ones mind and makes you think about what you feel when you see the work at first and what you may already know. This creates a battle with perception and sel f. His works are known to be thought out works of experiences that make one wonder about what they are seeing, and if what they are seeing is really there. This is why I think Olafur Eliassion stands out the most in the wolrd of environmental installation. He creates installations that make people question about their own spatial awareness, and I think its something a person would have to experience first hand to fully understand.Citationshttp//eliasson.com.au/. Take Your Time.. 2010. http//www.artdaily.com/index.asp?int_sec=2int_new=24332. Art Daily .2010.Olafur Eliasson Space Is Process. 2010Studio Olafur Eliasson An EncyclopediaHuman Rights Universal or a Western Construct?Human Rights Universal or a Western Construct?Since the beginning of Human Rights until recent Human Rights issues, the interpretation and apprehension of Human Rights have been diversified importantly. Western construct have played a big role in the creation of Human Rights and in inquisitive the meaning of universal rights. The rights one has because one is human is a clear and concise meaning of human rights, which is an appurtenance to an individual, where certain parts are not included, such as benefits. The westbound ideology of Human Rights have greatly inputted in Human Rights through various concepts that have been introduced to non western sandwich societies. These various concepts of western construct have influenced Universal Human Rights, where western politics have greatly altered the concept of Human Rights, also through closure which is especially affected autochthonic communities, and by western stopping points and societies. The western construct of Human Rights is eminently viewed in Human Rights, which are present in both western and non western societies.Human Rights have gradually been altered and changed to insert western values and political thoughts into non-western states and societies. The western political emphasis for the right to development and to li cense from hunger is predominate in Africa as a rightYet, some of these rights do not correlate within societies in Africa. In result of this, many African leaders repudiated western political emphasis of Human Rights into their societies and designed their own Human Rights Charter, or also known as the African (Banjul) Charter on Human Rights, to suit their society.3 Even though the African Charter was created to suit the African society, western political influence is still clearly evident in the charter. Individual freedoms and rights as values has lost its moment in non western political thought, which is much of a variance, though non western societies have trouble determinating this significance that would be easier in western societies. Political influence is widely viewed in Human Rights and it influences the rights that are also used in non western societies.The western concept was also brought through colonisation and it too affected the Human Rights significantly. It is how the western ideology was introduced in non western societies. Colonialism creates the basis and idea of Human Rights throughout history. The colonisation of certain states that have endemical People has influenced the Human Rights that are present in their societies. The fleet that arrived in countries with Indigenous People, particularly Australia, were asserted in the Indigenous Community without their permission, thus resulting in ascendancy in the communities. Bringing civilisation and the religion of Christianity was a priority for the fleet, to introduce them with their style of Human Rights. Though, this occurrence terminate in a bloody way by killing and damaging many of the Indigenous People in order to universalise universal incorrupt values. Indigenous People were greatly affected through colonisation all due to insertion of western construct of Human Rights, which resulted in many casualties disbelieving whether basic Human Rights have been breached just for intro ducing the western construct of Human Rights.The post colonisation period, many Indigenous people have been ridiculed and degraded in society. Many rights, which are of western construct, are evident in the Indigenous society, where it lacked some rights or in some cases the rights did not fit in. Group rights, which are rights intended for a group of people, created problems in the Indigenous community. Group rights were mainly to do with economy and social class, rather than individual problems such as racial discrimination and ethnicity. Some speculate that if the existence of Group Rights was not evident, ethnic integration would not have been as difficult, and an end to ethnic hostility would have been seen.6 Indigenous People are seen to be excluded from the social life and economic opportunity, through practical questions such as why are their health conditions worse? et cetera. unaccompanied a handful of governments apologised to the Indigenous People, which brought them c loser to the western society and the reconciliation process was starting to take effect.6 Colonisation was seen to affect Indigenous Communities and result in western rights implemented into their societies.Through colonisation, western culture has been introduced and changed, through Human Rights, in non western societies and cultures. It differs greatly from the cultures evident in non western societies. Indigenous Rights, in Latin America, was seen to be the main priority. It focused on the state abusing the Indigenous people and pushing for Indigenous people to have rights to their land and culture The Spanish community and people in Latin America have been introducing western culture into the Indigenous community of Latin America, thus implementing the Human Rights as a western construct. It is evident that in Universal Human Rights, the cultural imperialism is dominant by the west. The argument brought by Fernando Teson is that domination of certain attitudes seen in cultures, are hence appropriate and moral. Another point Teson argues is that ethnocentrism that relativists view are not supplying the same basic rights to non western cultures as opposed to the western cultures receiving those rights. Western culture has been a big influence in the non-western cultures and societies, it change the rights significantly in the non western society and adapted the western idea and thought but in the same time the western construct of rights was viewed differently in the non western cultures.The western society has also greatly impacted on the non western society, with the influence of western life and living which altered the Human Rights, and thus impacting it on the non western society. Human Rights, to a certain extent, accepts the idea that they are rights of the human in society. In 1789 the French recognised and stated the fundamentals of Human Rights which are evident in society, suggests that society too is in power to deliberate those rights, stating that western society can change and dismantle any specific right in any society.Edmund Bourke creates one of the most protruding historical criticism of the notion that Universal Human Rights derives from western construct and western societies that are implemented into non western societies. He argues that the French revolution changed the rights of many individuals and groups in society into a western for of rights. Bourkes Reflections on the Revolution in France, states a large argument of tralatitious communities and problems in traditional values, such as religion and loyalty, creates problems, disorder and equity of western societies, thus the western societies alter many of the rights in order to suit their desires and to comply with the way they live Western society has changed many of the traditional concepts in non western society, thus the western society impacting greatly on non western societies with Human Rights.It is evident that the western construct has greatly i mpacted and significantly changed and altered the idea of Human Rights. These Human Rights are being implemented into non western societies, and the eastern oriental community are having to follow these concepts and ideas. The ironic human action of The Universal Declaration of Human Rights is much seen as a western creation of Human Rights. The examples shown in this essay argues the idea of western construct in the universal human rights through various factors such as politics, culture, colonisation and society.

Charlotte Haze

Charlotte HazeLiterature is non solely a method of entertainment. It is also apply to aggrandize a readers mind by eachowing them to enter a different world. To do so, a reader will often countenance to suspend their disbelief. It is precise step to the fore of date that one must question what he/she is reading. Vladimir Nabokovs Lolita is the confession of an erudite European intellectual with an obsessive desire for nymphets-girls between the ages of nine and fourteen who be, as he judges them, sexually aw are. In Humbert Humberts confession, he admits to the years of molestation of a junior girl referred to as Lolita (Dolores Haze). This confession is written by him while awaiting rivulet for a seemingly unrelated complete. At the end of the novel, Humbert states that the murder he committed was an act of love and he rationalizes non only his violence still his pedophilia. Although the confession seems free-flowing and a spur of the moment decision on the divulge of the narrator, how does Nabokov picture that Humbert Humbert is an undependable narrator through the use of literary devices and lingual patterns in Lolita? Despite Humbert Humberts horrid crimes, his language and wordplay make for a more pleasant reading take in than one would expect. Through the use of shareization, diction, and semblance and contrast, Nabokov suggests that Humbert is unreliable and knowingly writes a tale that paints himself as a victim of circumstances.CharacterizationAs Humbert Humbert is the narrator of the novel, he characterizes the individuals in the degree. No second opinions are presented on that pointfrom the reader is shedn a one-dimensional interpretation of each character. There are clues in the novel that suggest Humberts descriptions are prejudiceed in his favour, including the rapid changes in the characters personalities and the tone in which they are describe.Humberts descriptions of Charlotte Haze, in occurrence, change significantl y as the story progresses. Charlotte, Lolitas mother and Humberts thus fartual wife in the novel, is a bourgeoisie American housewife who aspires to be sophisticated and cultured. Her relationship with her daughter is strained as she focuses all her attention on accommodating her lodger Humbert Humbert, who finds her intolerable and apparently wants access to Lolita (Dolores Haze). During the beginning of the novel and the beginning of their relationship, Humbert refers to Charlotte only when as the Haze woman. His disgust and aggravation is apparent even at the mention of her straw man. When first describing Charlotte to the reader, Humbert states I think I had better describe her right away, to get it over with. She was, obviously, one of those woman whose minute words may reflect a contain clubbut never her soul women who are completely devoid of humour (Nabokov 37). His dislike for Charlotte is made clear from the moment she is introduced to the reader however Humbert co ntinues to point out her graininess and want of sophistication. One night, while secretly fondling Lolita on the front porch, Humbert writes Lo fidgeted a good deal so that finally her mother t of age(predicate) her sharply to vary it and sent her doll flying into the dark (Nabokov 46). Charlottes behaviour seems over-the-top and disdainful. However, it is interesting that whenever Humbert has any inappropriate contact with Lolita, he follows quickly by writing of Charlottes condescension towards her daughter. After his contact with Lolita on the front porch, he instead sarcastically writes the following excerptLolita had been spiteful, if you please, at the age of one, when she used to throw her toys out of her crib, so that her poor mother should keep picking them up, the villainous infant. Now, at twelve, she was a regular pest, said Haze. Her grades were poor. Of course, moodiness is a common concomitant of growing up, but Lolita exagerrated. crusty and evasive. Rude and d efiant (Nabokov 46).Although expressing Charlottes frustration with her daughter, the speech is non a direct quote from Charlotte indicating that Humbert is paraphrasing what she has told him. This harsh-toned speech seems to be a convenient ploy on the part of the narrator to distract from the fact that he took advantage of a young girls trust for his hold physical gratification. In fact, throughout the novel, Humberts abuse of Lolita is followed by negatively charged dialogues from the other characters. Nabokov seems to suggest that Humberts confession is well thought-out and biased in his favour. It seems the narrator wants to justify his actions. After Lolita tags along to a shopping trip with him and Charlotte, Humbert quotes her mother as saying It is intolerable that a child should be so ill-manneredwhen she knows she is unwanted (Nabokov 51). While they are driving, Humbert takes advantage of Lolitas proximity to hold, stroke, and squeeze her little paw all the way to the store (Nabokov 51). Humbert uses Charlottes contempt towards Lolita to justify his affection towards her. Although this physical contact is outwardly innocent, Humberts intentions are cl archean pedophilic. It is by characterizing Charlotte as unmotherly and unkind that Humbert tries to gain the readers sympathy. He portrays himself as a father figure providing a mistreated girl with love.Before her death in the novel, Charlotte is portrayed as a brutal, unloving mother. However, subsequently she is accidently killed, Humbert is free to parent Lolita. After he collects Lolita from the summer camp she was compel to attend, one notices the change in the tone he uses to address Charlotte. Lolita, since returning from camp, has remained hard and moody. After Humbert has consummated his relationship with the young girl, they engage on a long road trip including many pit stops and shopping trips. The adolescent girl is not particularly enjoying their voyage and is understandably vulga r and upset. Humbert is quoted many times as saying Charlotte, I begin to understand you (Nabokov 149). Humbert narrates and characterizes other individuals in a way that will arouse sympathy for himself. Previously, when Humbert would engage in inappropriate contact with Lolita, he would deliberately point out her mothers unaffectionate constitution to justify his touching her child. Now that Charlotte, the obstacle, has been overcome and Humbert regularly molests and abuses her daughter, he points out Lolitas insufferable qualities. He now understands Charlotte and points out that she was not as negative a person as she seemed. Humbert does this in order to paint himself as a tired father putting up with his difficult daughters every whim.Humberts descriptions of Lolita also change, removing the characters likeability as the story progresses. At the beginning of the novel, Lolita is exposit as closely resembling Annabel, Humberts childhood love. Humbert explains that he is insta ntly captivated by her beauty When I passed her in my great(p) disguise, the vacuum of my soul managed to suck in every detail of her bright beauty (Nabokov 39). Although Lolita is a mediocre American child, vulgar and even less polished than her mother, Humbert seems to view the girl through rose-coloured glasses. To him, she is not vulgar, but charming, not aggressive, but misunderstood by her wretched mother. Although Humbert does not appreciate Lolitas idolization of American startle culture, nothing much else is said with regards to her intellect. Interesting to note is Lolitas minimal dialogue in this part of the novel. She does not say much, except for her frequent arguments with Charlotte. In these arguments, Lolita is not portrayed as a delicate child, but rather a strong-willed, aggressive girl. I think you stink and this is a free country are some of the arguments made to her mother during their verbal fights (Nabokov 46). During one particular fight, Humbert writes Lat er, I heard a great banging of doors and other sounds coming from quaking caverns where the dickens rivals were having a ripping row (Nabokov 48). Writing this, Humbert indicates that Lolita is able to hold her own against her mother. She is not the type to be trampled over or forced to do anything. By including dialogues and descriptions much(prenominal) as these, Humbert suggests that Lolita is a strong child who gets what she wants.In addition to describing her bad-temper, the physical contact between Humbert and Lolita is always said to be instigated by the girl. Humbert narrates Presently an old gray tennis ball bounced over Charlotte, and Los voice came from the house haughtily Pardonnez, Mother. I was not aiming at you. Of course not, my hot downy darling (Nabokov 55). What to an sightly person would seem like a playful act derived from boredom, Humbert tries to illustrate as an act of seduction. Humbert portrays Lolita as a willing participant in his games, as shown in th e following excerpt Humbert Humbert intercepted her apple. In a sham effort to retrieve it, Lo was all over me. Every movement she made, every shuffle and ripple, helped me to confine and to improve the secret system of tactile correspondence between beast and beauty-between my gagged, bursting beast and the beauty of her dimpled body in its innocent cotton frock (Nabokov 58-59). Although Humbert sits there around inert during this encounter, and although Lolita comes to him, he instigates the situation by innocently taking her fruit from her.After her stay at a summer camp, Lolitas sexuality has changed drastically as the reader learns she has had her first sexual encounter. In this part of the novel, through direct quotes, Lolita is characterized differently. She is very teasing of Humbert I did not miss you. Fact Ive been revoltingly unfaithful to you, but it does not matter one bit, because youve stopped caring for me anywayyou havent kissed me yet, have you? (Nabokov 112). H umbert then narrates Lolita positively flowed into my arms (Nabokov 113). This is the first serious encounter the two characters have a kiss Humbert narrates as having been Lolitas idea. Although Humbert describes the confidence with which Lolita engages in this behaviour, he also reveals that it was but an innocent game on her part, an imitation of fake romance.Having already baffled her virginity to a young man at camp, Lolita initiates sexual intercourse with Humbert during their stay at a hotel. However, more than a romantic partner, Nabokov illustrates Lolita as a young girl in search of affection of any kind. Charlotte, not fitting the maternal archetype whatsoever, was jealous of the relationship between Humbert and Lolita. Having not yet intentional that her mother is dead, and believing Humbert and Charlotte are still married, Lolitas contact and conversation with Humbert resembles a bitter act of rebellion against her mother who forced her to attend camp (an experience s he describes as dirty and naughty despite her cool demeanor). Having sex with Humbert seems like more of a game to Lolita as she does not understand the severity of her actions. However, it is a way of betraying her mother, just as Charlotte betrayed her by sending her to camp. When Humbert reveals in a most insensitive way that Charlotte is dead, Lolita is truly heartbroken. Humbert writes At the hotel, we had separate rooms, but in the middle of the night she came sobbing into mine, and we made it up very gently (Nabokov 142). The quotation suggests that the two engaged in sexual relations once again, and although Humbert does not specify why Lolita was crying, it was most certainly due to the death of her mother and not the mild argument she had with him. The statement illustrates a young girl with no one to turn to except for the adult who victimizes her. Having lost her mother, her only remaining parent, Lolita turns to Humbert-her technical father. He uses her need for affecti on to gain control of the situation for his own physical gratification.Despite frequent dialogues and descriptions in which Lolita is shown to be unhappy and vulnerable, Humbert adds his own biased interpretations of Lolitas behaviour. She is characterized as a manipulative, able girl. If she is not bought certain things, if she is not allowed to go to certain powers, Lolita withholds sex from Humbert. This is an unfavourable depiction of the young girl as her body is the only power she possesses. She has no money, and without Humbert, she cannot survive. In order to put herself in a position of power and achieve some sort of reward for her suffering, Lolita uses her sexuality-something Humbert describes as cruel, manipulative promiscuity. Killing Clare Quilty, the man with whom Lolita runs away, Humbert describes as an act of love for having forced Lolita into poverty. His possessiveness in this part of the novel indicates that he is defending his honour rather than hers. Humbert writes his confession in order to convince the reader that though he is guilty, he was controlled by a force greater than himself. Through his dynamic characterization of the other characters, Humbert inadvertently reveals he is only interested in telling the story from a viewpoint that will allow the reader to sympathize with him.DictionIn addition to character development in Lolita, diction is also revelatory of Humberts unreliable narration. throughout the novel, the reader is entranced by Humberts fancy prose style. It is the language used that makes the grotesque themes in the novel bearable. However, many recurring words and linguistic patterns used by Humbert betray the persona he wants to create.Although Humbert wants his confession to seem unbiased and unplanned, the first paragraphs of the novel indicate that his confession is directed to a particular audience-the ladies and gentlemen of the jury (Nabokov 9). He, himself, titles his work Lolita, as it is essentially the s tory of the young girl. However, the foreword written by the fictional Dr. John Ray titles it The Confession of a discolor Widowed Male. It is interesting that it is always during the most grotesque scenes in the novel that Humbert directly acknowledges the presence of the reader. When pondering whether or not to kill Charlotte, Humbert directly engages the reader(s) And, folks, I just couldnt In silence I turned shorewardand still I could not make myself drown the poor, slippery, big-bodied creature (Nabokov 87). At times during the confession, Humberts writing becomes almost self-reflective-it seems he gets lost in his past experiences. Nonetheless, in the moments where his morals come into question and where his behaviour becomes criminal, he speaks directly to the reader. Humbert almost acts as his own lawyer, and in an eloquent persuasive tone, tries to sway the reader in his favour.Humbert also uses wordplay to foreshadow Clare Quiltys involvement and significance to the stor y. In the beginning of the novel, Humbert reads a review. Clare Quiltys name appears, on base others, and plays are listed including The particular Nymph and Fatherly Love. Humbert says that Lolita could have appeared in a play called The Murdered Playwright, alluding to playwright Clare Quiltys murder. Quiltys presence is always felt in Lolita even before his character is introduced. This leads the reader to believe that Humberts narrative is not free-flowing, but rather serves a direct purpose to gain sympathy from the reader for the murder he committed.In addition to the change in audience, the connotation and tone of the words used change depending on the situation. Besides Humberts descriptions of nymphets, every other character and experience in his confession is described with cynicism and irritation. Nymphets are introduced as fantastical beings Nine and fourteen are the boundaries-the mirrory beaches and rosy rocks-of an enchanted island haunted by those nymphetsand surro unded by a vast, misty sea (Nabokov 16). This description seems out-of-character for Humbert, who otherwise presents himself to be (within reason) rational. Humbert also states that not all girls in this age range are nymphets. It is the slightly feline outline of a cheekbone, the slenderness of a downy limb which identify the little deadly demon offantastic power (Nabokov 17). Humbert chooses to coin the term nymphet instead of using the accept term of underage girl. By stating that he is not attracted to all young girls, Humbert tries to separate himself from regular pedophiles. The magical tone that surrounds these descriptions makes it seem as though Humbert is not in self-control and submits to the powers of these mystical demons who drive him to abnormality. It is interesting to note that Humbert is very scientific and technical in other parts of the book using patois such as pederosis and pseudolibidoes. The two different methods of speaking represent Humberts ability to ch ange according to circumstance.While trying to explain his helplessness in the presence of Lolita (and other nymphets), Humbert betrays himself through his word choice. Although eloquent, his possessiveness jumps off the page. Whenever speaking of Lolita, seemingly arbitrary descriptions include possessive pronouns. This is demonstrated numerous times in the novel How smugly would I marvel that she was mine, mine, mine (Nabokov 161). Constantly referring to the girl as my child, my Lo, my pet, Nabokov italicizes the pronouns to place emphasis on Humberts possessiveness. Furthermore, it is interesting to look at the sentence structure. Whenever events take place involving other people, Humbert makes sure to unite Lolita and himself Last night, we sat on the piazza, the Haze woman, Lolita and I. Even when writing, Humbert must remain close to Lolita, using punctuation to separate Charlotte from the two of them.Humbert tries to label Lolita as the seducer and instigator of their physic al relationship She played with and kept sticking to my lap (Nabokov 45). Descriptions of such scenes are never explicit, but when movements are described, they are always those of Lolita. Humbert leads the reader to believe he is just a pawn in Lolitas game. In another section of the story, he writes that Lolita struck Humbert, quite painfully (Nabokov 65). This is yet another example of Humbert purposefully showcasing Lolitas strength and willpower. Surprisingly, he refers to himself in the third person-something he does often when he bribes/seduces Lolita. It is unavoidable for Humbert to implicate himself in the novel, but when he narrates the more disturbing things he does, he never personalizes it, using Humbert instead of I or me. By doing so, Humbert defeats the purpose of a confession, not really acknowledging it was him who did anything wrong.Although Lolita is shown to sometimes be an hasty child, the words used to describe her when shes around Humbert always paint her as bold and aggressive. She is said to make Humbert nervous. When Lolita reproaches him for his lack of kissing skill, Humbert tells her to show him wight ray (Nabokov 120). It seems out-of-character for the eloquent Humbert to be so inarticulate. However, through the use of diction and punctuation, Nabokov suggests that Humbert does not directly quote characters in the novel. In one part of the novel, Humbert writes Look, we need to go, said Lolitaor something along that line (Nabokov 76). Even though Lolita is clearly quoted, Humbert cannot be sure. This allows the reader to create distrust in Humbert, as he clearly changes dialogue. Many of the letters and conversations Humbert includes in the confession, he admits are paraphrased. Therefore, it is quite difficult to completely trust Humberts story as some of his bias has inevitably seeped through.Also interesting are the nicknames given by Humbert to other characters. Charlotte is also known as the Haze woman, cold big Haze and m aam Hum. Humbert reveals his own mercurial nature by changing the connotation of the nicknames depending on his mood. The fact that his opinions of other characters change so rapidly and so often indicate that Humbert is using them to better his image in the eyes of the reader.There are instances where Humbert seems disgusted with himself, describing his attraction to nymphets as a monstrous love(Nabokov 83). Immediately after he reproaches himself, Humbert goes on to support pedophilia We are not sex fiends We are unhappy, mild, dog-eyed gentlemen sufficiently well-integrated to control our urge in the presence of adults, but ready to give yearsof life for one chance to touch a nymphet. Emphatically, no killers are we (Nabokov 88). Humbert never apologizes for his behaviour, admitting it is only society that makes him feel deviant.Contrast ComparisonNabokov uses contrast and comparison in Lolita to indicate Humbert Humberts biased narration. Humbert often defends his pedophilia-re primanding societys hypocrisy. He compares his relationship with Lolita to many historical couples American president Abraham Lincoln and his younger wife, Italian scholar Petrarch and 12 year-old Laureen, and poet Dante Alighieri and his 9 year-old companion. Humbert mentions these relationships as if to validate his relationship with Lolita. These men, whose women were often their muse, served great purpose to society. Humbert questions the confines the law puts on his people (pedophiles), as these men of great consideration improved the world while sharing his love of nymphets. It is important to note Humbert does not dwell on the age of these men or the time bound they lived in (hundreds of years ago).In addition to this, Humbert makes a direct comparison between Annabel, his childhood love, and Lolita. Dolores Haze takes on multiple names Lo, Lola, Dolly, Hot Little Haze, and Lolita. Humbert states that in his arms, she was always Lolita (Nabokov 9). Later on in the novel, on e discovers that Lolita is derived from combining Annabels name with the name Dolores. Annabel Lee and Dolores produce Lo-lee-ta. Although Humbert ridicules psychiatrists, he drops many clues (including this wordplay) that suggest that Annabels early death is the reason for his attraction to underage girls. A love taken from him during a fragile age leading to sickness-this image, he hopes, will arouse the readers sympathy. In the novel, Humberts love scenes with Annabel are somewhat explicit they use many metaphors and symbols I was ready to offer her everything, my heart, my throat, my entrails, I gave her to hold in her awkward fist the brink of my passion (Nabokov 15). As he and Annabel are of the same age, Humbert can be more direct with the reader in these scenes. Conversely, Lolitas sexual scenes with Humbert are quick and do not describe any physical interaction. One assumes that Humbert does this to avoid arousing disgust in the reader. This indicates that Humbert formulat es his story in a way that keeps the reader on his side.Throughout Lolita, comparisons are made between older women and girls Humbert deems to be nymphets. Older women, no matter their role in Humberts life, are always unattractive, cruel and unintelligent. Valeria, Humberts first wife, is described as fat, dumb and completely inept. Charlotte Haze is also fat, disgusting and irritating. Young girls are always painted as desirable. The most beautiful language is used to convince the reader of the power of these nymphets. They are seductive, physically-tone, and delicate (Nabokov 17). Humbert tries to illustrate older women as revolting, so the reader will be able to empathize with his lifestyle. younger boys, however, are never described in the same light as young girls. They are dirty, repulsive, and dangerous. Any boy Lolita speaks to, any waiter who comes into contact with her is described negatively. Humbert portrays himself as Lolitas protector, unwilling to let her be tarnish ed by these lowly creatures.This is how he sees Clare Quilty. He is the man who kidnaps his daughter and then abandons her. Before Humbert discovers that Quilty is the man Lolita runs away with, Humbert sets out on a mission to trace the fugitiveto destroy his brother (Nabokov 247). In the final scenes where Humbert and Quilty are fighting, Humbert narrates I rolled over him. We rolled over me. They rolled over him. We rolled over us (Nabokov 299). This is the only time in the novel when Humbert (indirectly) acknowledges his mistakes. Referring to Quilty as his brother, Humbert illustrates that they are one in the same. They both helped in destroying a young girl. This is the only moment of remorse shown in the novel, as Humbert quickly reverts back to condemning Quilty.ConclusionAlthough readers often expect the narrator of a novel to be completely truthful, it is important to question the reliability of the narrator. In Lolita, Nabokov indicates that narrator Humbert Humbert has h is own personal agenda and tells the story in a very biased way through the use of characterization, diction, and comparison and contrast. Why then is this novel so compelling to read? Why does the reader insist on being lectured by the corrupt Humbert and feeding into his lies? Although the narrator is biased in his assertions, Nabokov makes sure to include several clues to help the reader discover Humberts deception. Lolita is not simply escape literature, as it requires the reader to actively think about the story being told. By placing trust in the reader and stimulating their intelligence, Nabokov has created one of the literary masterpieces of all time.

Language Relativity Hypothesis

phraseology Relativity HypothesisLanguage Relativity Hypothesis lingual Relativity Hypothesis Does Language Affect Out Thoughts? pilferBenjamin lee Whorf and his teacher and mentor Edward Sapir developed the theory that row affects our thoughts and perceptions. This theory proposes that there is a agreementatic birth between the grammar of a spoken communication a person speaks and how that person both to a lower placestand the world and be keep ups in it. Today linguists now c only that theory the lingual Relativity Hypothesis, or Whorf-Sapir Hypothesis. Studies have not conclusively proven Whorfs and Sapirs theory, however, there is intriguing data to support their idea. Does Language Shape our Thoughts?Most humans communicate with each other by means of wording. At this time, there is thought to be over 5000 diametric wordss in use today, and most be quite different from each other (Stanford encyclopedia, n.d.). The relationship between language and thought is an impor tant question in Cognitive attainment. Do speakers of different languages think of differently about the world? This question has been attracting thinkers from Plato to Whorf, alone despite more attention and debate, definitive answers have not been forthcoming. Benjamin Lee Whorf and his mentor and teacher Edward Sapir, examined the question of how language affects our thoughts, in their renowned and much considered Linguistic Relativity Hypothesis.Linguistic relativity theory hypothesis/ Whorf-Sapir hypothesisLinguistic relativity or what is also referred to as the Whorf-Sapir hypothesis, was developed by Benjamin Lee Whorf and was an expansion on his mentor, Edward Sapirs, theory that language has a coherent and systematic nature and interacts at a wider level with thought and behavior (Yale University, n.d.). Whorf proposed that there is a systematic relationship between the grammar of a language a person speaks and how that person both understand the world and behaves in i t (Whorf, 1956). The hypothesis postulates that a grumpy languages nature influences the popular thought of its speakers that different language patterns yield different patterns of thought (Stanford encyclopedia, n.d.)Though there is no empirical proof of this hypothesis, there is convince data to support this theory. In the past, the bulk of research was concentrated on supporting or disproving the Whorfs hypothesis, with very little new research being do (Lucy, 1992). According to Lucy (1992) there is little experimental data that is able to disprove Whorfs theory, and they argon questioned due to the research methods used (Lucy, 1992). However, in the last decade, Whorfs idea has taken on new enthusiasm within the linguist research community and new data is emerging that supports the original idea.Benjamin Lee WhorfAccording to the Linguistic department at Yale University (n.d.) Benjamin was an influential American linguist that first graduated first from the Massachusetts Institute of engine room (MIT) in 1918 with a point in chemical engineering. In 1931, Whorf changed focus and began studying his passion for linguistics at Yale University, where he first began developing his now far-famed hypothesis under his professor and mentor Edward Sapir.In 1936, Whorf was selected for an Honorary Research Fellowship in Anthropology at Yale and received the Sterling Fellowship in 1937. He was a reader in Anthropology from 1937 through 1938 in the field of linguistics. Whorf focus was Linguistic Anthropology, Psychological Linguistics, Mayan hieroglyphics and a dictionary of Hopi languages (Yale Linguistics, n.d.). This is where he began to develop his ideas about language and our perceptions.Principle of Linguistic RelativityZhu Zhifang (2002) author of Linguistic relativity and Cultural Communication, shares that while Whorf was investigated Hebrew, Aztec, Maya, Hopi and other unfamiliar languages, he discovered that these languages were social systemd d ifferently from that of English and other European languages. Languages, with different collocations of semantic ideas might provide different segmentation of experience (Whorf, 1956 p. 56). Zhifang (2002) continues to clarify that Whorf put a great deal of emphasis on the Hopi language.A language, he thought, had a grammar much more complicated and subtle than that of the European languages. Whorf saw that experiences were segmented by language in a very different way, not only by its lexicon but also by its grammatical organization. The notion of linguistic relativity is the suggestion that all ones life has been tricked by the building of language into a certain way of perceiving reality, with the implication that awareness of this trickery will enable one to see the world with fresh insight (Zhifang 2002, p.263). With a detailed description of the grammatical and semantic structure of the Hopi language, Whorf concludesAll this is an illustration of how language produces an org anization of experience. We are inclined to think of language simply as a technique of expression, not to realize that language first of all is a classification and arrangement of the stream of sensory experience which results in a certain world order, a certain segment of the world that is easily expressible by the type of symbolic means that language employs. (Whorf, 1956, p. 55)Language Metaphysics (Philosophy)Eleanor Rosch (1987) explains in her paper, Linguistic relativity, etc. A Review of General Semantics, that the average European languages uses objects (nouns) as the basic unit of reality, which is composed of substance, form, and actions (verbs). All of which, Rosch (1987) describes, as existing in an objective, three-dimensional space, and a one-dimensional uniform and perpetual flow of time, expressed in sentence tense, that create our perceptions.Rosch (1987) further explains that in his study of the Hopi language, Whorf discovered that they do not differentiate betwee n objects and actions. Object and actions are more accurately described as events, different from each other according to a length of time. Instead of considering substance, motion, space, and time, Hopi grammar separates their world by deuce main beliefs about language, manifested (objective) and Un-manifest (Subjective) (Rosch, 1987). Manifested comprises all that is or has been accessible to the senses, and un-manifested is considered all that the Hopi call the future (Rosch, 1987).Zhifang (2002) takes Roschs ideas and further demonstrates that Whorf discovered the Hopi language functions enti verify without tenses for its verbs and has no general apprehension or perception of time and does not think of time as a linear continuum in which all in the world moves at an equal rate. The Hopi language contains no words, grammatical forms, constructions or expressions referring directly to what Europeans call time, or to past, present, future, or to enduring or permanent . (Zhifang, 2002, p. 164).Rosch (1987) states that the metaphysics understood in the sentence structure of European languages, makes it reasonable to examine and evaluate sentences into, what we consider actions, and results of actions. However, according to Whorf, these ideas are gross distortions when used as units of digest for various American Indian Languages. (Rosch, 1987).According to Rosch (1987), Whorf uses the example of how Indian languages translate into English as a demonstration of the differences in thought processes between the two languages. He uses Apache, It is a dripping spring is deciphered as As water, or springs, whiteness moves downward in English. Another example, in Shawnee, cleaning gas with a ramrod is direct hollow moving dry spot by movement of tool in English (Rosch, 1987).Zhifang (2002) sums up Roschs observations by stating that Whorf argued that every language conceals a metaphysics. (Zhifang 2002, p. 163) The Hopi language applies a philosophy unlike that of European languages. Zhifang, (2002) explains that the difference in concepts and abstractions associated with Hopi language make up a foreign metaphysics from that of European languages. From the Hesperian standpoint, this philosophy appears mystical in nature (Zhifang, 2002).They are ideas which we are accustomed to consider as part and parcel either of alleged(prenominal) animistic or vitalistic beliefs, or of those transcendental unifications of experience and intuitions of things unseen that are felt by the consciousness of the mystic, or which are given out in mystical and (or) so-called occult systems of thought. These abstractions are definitely given either explicitly in wordspsychological or metaphysical termsin the Hopi language, or, even more, are implicit in the very structure and grammar of the language, as well as being observable in Hopi culture and behavior. (Whorf, 1956, p. 58-59).Whorf is not the only one who had this idea of cultural differences in language. Alf red Korzybski came to a corresponding view of cultural differences in language, several years before Whorf. He explained that, Culturally inherited structure of an individuals language, including his or her terminology, grammar, logic, semantics, doctrines, etc. relates to assumptions, premises, implications about the structure of ourselves and the world. (Korzybski, 1933, p. 92). pen Alfred Korzybski (1933), in is article Science and Sanity, summed up the power of language wellWe do not realize what tremendous power the structure of a ordinary language has. It is not an exaggeration to say that it enslaves us through the mechanism of semantic or evaluational reactions and that the structure which a language exhibits, and impresses upon us unconsciously is automatically projected upon the world around us (Korzybski, 1933, p. 90).Language and Thought As demonstrated through Whorfs observation of the Hopi language and the differences in semantics from European language, we see a pa ttern of information that gave rise to his hypothesis. However, Lera Boroditsky, professor at Massachusetts Institute of Technology, (MIT), reminds us that a definitive answer to the questions does language shape thoughts?, has been a challenging task (Boroditsky, 2003). Not until the last decade, has research on language and thought gained new bear on. As a result, new evidence has become available on peoples perspectives of space, time, and objects.Spatial differences in Language and ThoughtRemarkable differences in semantics have been ascertained in the way languages illustrate spatial locations. epoch most languages rely a great deal on relative spatial terms to express the relative locations of objects (left, right, prior, derriere), Tzeltal, a Mayan language, relies largely on absolute reference (a system similar to English labor union and south direction system) (Levinson, 1996) .Levinson (1996), points out that to the Tzeltal, spatial observations that are north are exp ressed as downhill and those south are expressed as uphill. This absolute uphill/downhill approach is the main system to express spatial relations between objects in Tzeltal. There is no corresponding equivalent to the English term front/back or left/right (Levinson, 1996). To test whether this difference between the two languages has cognitive consequences, Levinson (1996) created a study whereas Dutch and Tzeltal speakers were tested in spatial tasks. In one study, participants were seated at a table and an pointer lay in front of them pointing either to the right (north) or to the left (south). Levinson (1996) explains how the arrows were rotated 180 degree to a second table which had two arrows (one pointing to the left (north) and one to the right (south), and were asked to list the arrow like the one they saw before.The study reveled that Dutch speakers would choose the relative solution. Further testing of Levinsons (1996) theory showed that if the arrow pointed to the righ t (and north), Dutch speakers would chose the arrow that still pointed to the right (though this time it pointed south instead of the previous north).Tzeltal did precisely the reverse, and chose the absolute solution. Levinson (1996) confirmed that if the arrow direction was to the right (and north) Tzeltal speakers chose the arrow that still pointed north (though it now pointed left instead of right). Thus, explains Levinson (1996), the Tzeltal language relies a great deal on absolute reference in spatial description. It has also affected their understanding of a non-linguistic orientation task (Levinson, 1996).Time Differences in Language and Thought Languages also differ from one another on their use and understanding of time. While all languages use spatial expressions to address time (I will see you tomorrow, he was ahead of his time, he is behind in his homework), different languages use rum spatial terms (Boroditsky, 2001). He demonstrates how English primarily uses front/ba ck vocabulary to chew out about time, as evidence in terms such as we still have our vacation ahead of us, or that incident is behind us, or we are moving forward, or go back to the offset printing and take your shoes off before you enter. The language employed to organize events are the same as those used to articulate asymmetric horizontal spatial relations (he is looking forward to tomorrow or the hard times are behind us) (Boroditsky, 2001, p. 2).According to Boroditsky (2001), the Mandarin language also uses front/back spatial terms to describe time relationships such as the spatial term Xian (front) and Hou (back). What makes Mandarin remarkable is that the Mandarin language also systematically uses steep metaphors to address time. The special word shang (up) and xia (down) are often used discuss the sequence of events roughly translated into English as last and next (Boroditsky, 2001). Earlier events are said to be shang (up) and later events are said to be xia (down). In summary, both the Mandarin and English language use horizontal terms to talk about time. In addition Mandarin speakers also use the vertical term shang and xia (Boroditsky, 2001). Boroditsky (2001) discusses how the English and Mandarin ways of talking, lead to differences in how people think about time. Boroditsky (2001) analyzed a group of studies and discovered that Mandarin speakers tend to think about time vertically even when they are thinking for English. Boroditsky (2001) observed that Mandarin speakers could more rapidly confirm that March comes earlier than April, if they had just seen a vertical group of objects than if they had seen a horizontal arrangement. Boroditsky (2001) noticed that the opposite was uncoiled for English speakers.Another study showed that the extent to which Mandarin-English bilinguals think about time vertically is related to how old they were when they first began to learn English. According to Boroditsky (2001), this last conclusion implies tw o things language is a convincing tool in the influence of thought and ones native language plays a role in shaping habitual thought.Objects Languages also differ in how name calling of objects are grouped into grammatical categories. Boroditsky (2001) uses the argument that a some(prenominal) languages use grammatical gender and unlike English, many languages use a grammatical gender system where all nouns (chair, socks and books) are nail downed a gender. Languages that use grammatical gender are required to assign objects a gender role by using gendered pronouns and modifying adjectives or verbs to match gender use with nouns (Boroditsky, 2001). This effects the how a person thinks about inanimate objects when appoint a gender. Boroditsky, together Michal Ramscar and Wendy Ham, conducted four studies that suggests assigning grammatical genders to objects with language does influence peoples mental representations of objects (Boroditsky, Ham Ramscar, 2002).Spanish and German s peakers were asked to rate similarities between pictures of people (male and female) and pictures of objects (the names of which had opposite genders in Spanish and German). Both groups rated grammatically feminine objects to be more similar to females and grammatically manlike objects more similar to males. This was true even though all objects had opposite genders in Spanish and German. It appears that even a small fluke of grammar (the seemingly arbitrary assignment of a noun to be masculine or feminine) can have an effect on how people think about things in the world (Boroditsky, et al, 2002, p. 136)Summary Through Whorf study of languages, especially his interest in Native Indian languages, he expanded on his mentors idea that language has a coherent and systematic nature to develop his now famous Linguistic Relativity Hypothesis. He was not the first to propose the idea that language affects our thoughts and perception, but it is his hypothesis that inspired others such as Le visons research on spatial relationships and language, and Boroditskys study of language in relationship to objects and time, to continue the search to find answers for his assumptions. Additional investigation into linguistic relativity will eventually wear the exact nature of the connections between language and cognitive function. These studies will help us to establish what might be the commonality of all human cognition.ReferencesBoroditsky, L. (2001). Does language shape thought? Mandarin and English speakersconception of time. Cognitive Psychology 43 (1) 1-22.Boroditsky, L., Ham, W. and Ramscar, M., (2002). What is universal about event perceptions?Comparing English and Idonesian speakers. Proceedings of the 24th yearly meeting of the Cognitive Science Society. Retrieved August 20, 2008, from http//www.cogsci.rpi.edu/CSJarchive/Proceedings/2002/CogSci02.pdfKodish, B. (2003). What we do with language what it does with us. Etc A Review of GeneralSemantics, 60(4), 383-395. Ret rieved August 20, 2008, from Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection database.Korzybski, A., 1994 (1933). Science and Sanity An introduction to non-aristotelian systemsand general semantics. Fifth Edition. Institute of general Semantics. Brooklyn, NYLevinson, S., (1996). Frames of reference and Molyneuxs question research into cross-linguistic evidence. In Bloom P and Peterson M (eds) Language and Space, pp. 109-169.Lucy, J. (1997). Linguistic relativity.Annual Review of Anthropology,26,291-312. RetrievedAugust 21, 2008, from Research Librarydatabase. (Document ID21752097).Rosch, E. (1987, Fall). Linguistic relativity, etc. A Review of General Semantics, 44(3), 254- 279. Retrieved August 20, 2008, from Education Research Complete database.Stanford Encyclopedia, (n.d.). The Linguistic relativity hypothesis. Stanford University.Retrieved August 20, 2008, from http//plato.stanford.edu/entries/relativism/supplement2.htmlYale Linguistics, (n.d.), Benjamin Lee Whorf. Yale University . Retrieved August 22, 2008,from website http//www.ling.yale.edu/history/whorf.html and http//www.ling.yale.edu/history/sapir.html.Whorf, B., (1956). Language, Thought, and Reality Selected Writings of Benjamin Lee WhorfEdited by Carroll, J., Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press, 1998. Retrieved August 20, 2008, from http//books.google.com/books?id=W2d1Q4el00QCprintsec=frontcoverdq=Language,+thought+and+realitysig=ACfU3U0-0aOK_v3HYwbXt0FxR-AVFVaT0APPA1,M1Zhifang, Z. (2002, May). Linguistic Relativity and Cultural Communication. EducationalPhilosophy Theory, 34(2), 161-170. Retrieved August 22, 2008, doi10.1080/00131850120102231.

Comparison Of King Lear And Gloucester Essay examples -- essays resear

Shakespeare uses subplots to dramatize the action of the play and give spark on the contrast for the themes in king Lear. Sub plots usually improve the effect of dramatic irony and suspense. The latter, which is used in queer Lear, gives us the understanding of the emotions of the characters in the play. This follows the parallelism between Gloucester and King Lear. In King Lear, the subplot of Gloucester corresponds to the major plot of King Lear. Both fathers have their own loyal legitimate child and their evil and disloyal child. They are both(prenominal) honourable men, who have children that return to them in their time of need. Gloucester and Lear are both tormented, and their favoured child recovers their life. In the early beginning of the play, Cordelia says that her love for her father is the love between father and daughter, no more, no less. Unhappy that I am, I cannot heave My heart into my mouth. I love your Majesty According to my bond, no more nor less. (Act 1 Sce ne 1 Pg. 13 lines 93-95) In response, King Lear goes into rage, and divides Cordelias share of the kingdom between her two unworthy sisters. Such injustice is encountered by Gloucester in the subplot. O villain, villain His very opinion in the letter Abhorred villain Unnatural, detested, brutish villain Worse than brutish Go, sirrah, seek him. Ill apprehend him. criminal villain Where is he? (Act 1 Scene 2 Pg. 37 lines 75-78) Gloucester fool...

What Really Counts as Learning :: Russell Thomas Essays

What Really Counts as LearningLearning happens in so more places and in so many ways. Maybe it is at the mall, or at home, or even in a classroom. For Russell Thomas it was in the poor town of das Island. In mouse hare Island, Russell has to learn many hard lessons in life. He learns that you cant change everything and that life isnt fair. Russell is forced to realize that failure is part of life and that it happens to all of us. These atomic number 18 all teachings that are irreplaceable and valuable. The lessons that Russell learns are ones that he will use for the rest of his life in his experiences. It is something that you can use on more than on the nose a test for school. That is what real life learning is about and in one way or another we have all experienced it.Russell is the master(prenominal) focus in Darcy Freys article about three basketball prodigies from Coney Island. Russell is a tremendous basketball player and hopes to get out of Coney Island on a b asketball scholarship. He has the skill to get that scholarship, but even with all that talent he has a major obstacle stop him. In order to attend college on a scholarship, a score of 700 is required on the SAT. Russell, on his first attempt, only gets a 500 when a 400 is earned just for signing your name. So in order to get that scholarship and 700, Russell dedicates large amounts of time to studying. If he wasnt working on basketball then he was working on his academics. After all that work Russell never gets his 700, or the scholarship. So therein lies the first lesson that Russell learns life isnt fair. Russell tries his hardest to bring up his grades and earn that 700, but when it comes down to it he has grown up in a low class area, without many opportunities. Frey described Coney Island as a place where there are no stores, no trees, no police just block after block of gray cementum projects (Frey 38). Russell had what can hardly be called an education. It is a p lace where most of the good basketball players with any chance at a scholarship never prepare it, they either end up dead or back in Coney Island dealing drugs.