Wittgenstein's work remains, undeniably, now, that off one of those few philosophers who will be read by all future generations.

Remarks on the Foundations of Mathematics. By L. Wittgenstein. Edited by G. H. Von Wright, R. Rhees and G. E. M. Anscombe. Translated by G. E. M. Anscombe. Pp. 400. 37s. 6d. 1956. (Basil Blackwell, Oxford)

PART ONE: THE THEORY AND PRACTICE OF LANGUAGE TEACHING PART TWO: ASPECTS OF LANGUAGE PART THREE: ASPECTS OF TEACHING

语言教学面面观 = Aspects of language teaching

This paper reviews the literature on plagiarism by students, much of it based on North American experience, to discover what lessons it holds for institutional policy and practice within institutions of higher education in the UK. It explores seven themes: the meaning and context of plagiarism, the nature of plagiarism by students, how do students perceive plagiarism, how big a problem is student plagiarism, why do students cheat, what challenges are posed by digital plagiarism and is there a need to promote academic integrity? It is concluded that plagiarism is doubtless common and getting more so (particularly with increased access to digital sources, including the Internet), that there are multiple reasons why students plagiarise and that students often rationalise their cheating behaviour and downplay the importance of plagiarism by themselves and their peers. It is also concluded that there is a growing need for UK institutions to develop cohesive frameworks for dealing with student plagiarism that a...

/pdf/in-other-people-s-words-plagiarism-by-university-students-1dawnlt793.pdf

In Other (People's) Words: Plagiarism by university students--literature and lessons

Logic, Semantics, Metamathematics. By A. Tarski. Translated by J. H. Woodger. Pp. 471. 60s. 1956. (Clarendon Press)

This article presents a theoretical framework of how people explain behavior. The framework, based on the folk concept of intentionality, distinguishes two major modes of explanation—reason explanation and cause explanation—as well as two minor modes and identifies conditions under which they occur. Three studies provide empirical support for these distinctions. As part of the framework, a detailed model of people's reason explanations is developed, which emphasizes the unique conceptual and linguistic features of reasons. This model points to limitations of traditional attribution concepts, which are examined theoretically and empirically. Finally, the theoretical framework incorporates attribution concepts, which apply to some but not all modes of explanation. Several paths for future research are outlined—on novel topics such as the roles of rationality and subjectivity in explanations and on classic topics such as the actor-observer asymmetry and the self-serving bias.

/pdf/how-people-explain-behavior-a-new-theoretical-framework-9lhswqvlum.pdf

How People Explain Behavior: A New Theoretical Framework

There is no doubt that the distinction drawn by Jonathan Cohen between the concepts of belief and acceptance is an important one.1 Certain long-standing philosophical problems seem remarkably more tractable once this conceptual clarification has been achieved, and I should go so far as to say that Cohen’s book is testimony to, and a great advertisement for, the utility of analytical philosophy. For example, the phenomenon of self-deceit (a real phenomenon rather than a philosophical contrivance) is extremely curious and recalcitrant both philosophically and psychologically. But, once we see, with Cohen, how a belief that p can be put on the back burner while at the same time a person is accepting not-p, the matter of self-deceit becomes vastly clearer (p. 141 ff.). Typically, a person who plays the stock market believes, deep down, that the only person likely to win is the stockbroker, yet, driven by greed, accepts the stockbroker’s forecast that he, the punter, will make stupendous financial gains. And one could use Cohen as a guide to good parenting: accept what your child says, even though you don’t believe a word of it. Again, the use that Cohen makes of his distinction to mollify both sides of the modern dispute between symbolic and connectionist modellers of the mind (p.53ff.) is, to my mind, greatly illuminating. And yet.......

Moore’s Paradox

`This statement is not true' is not true

Book Information Paradoxes: Their Roots, Range and Resolution. Paradoxes: Their Roots, Range and Resolution Nicholas Rescher, Chicago and La Salle : Open Court, 2001, xxiii + 293, US$24.95 (paper). By Nicholas Rescher. Open Court. Chicago and La Salle. Pp. xxiii + 293. US$24.95 (paper:).,

Paradoxes: Their Roots, Range and Resolution

La version du paradoxe du Menteur dite de l'Epimenide presente une difficulte particuliere, qui ne prend pas la forme d'une contradiction. L'A. rapproche cette difficulte du paradoxe traite par H. B. Curry en logique combinatoire, et conclut en proposant une explication de la presence generale de l'auto-reference dans les paradoxes semantiques

Epimenides and curry

In 1991 the Government of Hong Kong approved an English immersion program on a massive scale for children entering secondary school at age 12: It is targeted at 30% of that group. Called a Bridge Program, it aims to provide a bridge between primary schooling in the medium of Chinese and secondary schooling in English. The program teaches English through content subjects. The long-term target is a young adult population at least 30% of which is genuinely bilingual. Both authors have been engaged in designing and writing this program, and they report from the perspective of syllabus designers and materials writers informed by theory and guided by particular institutional and pedagogical needs. Unique aspects of their work, which may be of value to L2 teachers and researchers elsewhere, are elaborated. The article starts by describing the background to the program and investigating the gap to be bridged. It then takes a critical look at the role of communicative language teaching in content subject teaching. The article then reviews different theoretical assumptions of the Canadian immersion program and the Bridge Program; outlines the linguistic, content, and task components of the Bridge Program design; and documents some of the research problems that developed in this project.

Laurence Goldstein

Papers

Moore’s Paradox

`This statement is not true' is not true

Paradoxes: Their Roots, Range and Resolution

Epimenides and curry

An Integrated Approach to the Design of an Immersion Program