First of all, just to tell you that enrolment for the test is already online via ESSE3. There will be a difference between frequentante /non- frequentante so be careful! that you did not go over the number of absences!!! or if you did you should have talked to me!
Then for those of you who will be going on with Lab 2 in the second semester, the test d’ingresso is on 14 February. Even if you do not intend taking the test but wish to attend lessons you need to enrol.
Finally , have a very Merry Christmas and a Happy New year.
Si avvisano gli studenti del Corso di laurea in Chimica e Tecnologie Farmaceutiche che la prova orale di chimica fisica si terrà martedì 20 dicembre 2011 con inizio alle ore 9.30 in sala riunioni, Dip Scienze Chimiche, primo piano, Cittadella Universitaria, Monserrato.
La cerimonia di conclusione del Master EFECS, originariamente prevista per il giorno 22 c.m., è spostata al prossimo mese di gennaio.
Maggiori dettagli verranno comunicati più avanti.
L’orario di ricevimento per il momento è fissato al lunedì dalle 17 alle 19.
Per esigenze particolari e fissare un appuntamento diverso, mandatemi una mail.
Si avvisano gli studenti del Corso di laurea in Chimica e Tecnologie Farmaceutiche che la prova scritta di Chimica Fisica si terrà venerdì 16 dicembre 2011 alle ore 11 in aula alfa, cittadella universitaria di Monserrato.
Si comunica che il giorno 22 p.v. si terrà la manifestazione di conclusione del Master (ulteriori dettagli verranno forniti nei prossimi giorni).
E’ necessario, pertanto, che le relazioni finali, in versione elettronica arrivino via mail al prof. Malavasi entro e non oltre il 20 p.v.
La relazione (5-6 cartelle A4) può incentrarsi sia sull’attività di stage svolta presso le diverse organizzazioni, sia sugli esiti del progetto presentato prima dello stage e successivamente implementato.
Si avvisano gli studenti del Corso di laurea in Chimica e Tecnologie Farmaceutiche che la prova scritta di Chimica Fisica si terrà venerdì 16 dicembre 2011 e NON mercoledì 14 come comunicato in precedenza. Luogo e ora di svolgimento verranno comunicati a breve.
Taller de interpretación: Galleria immagini
Well, our lessons are coming to an end and we’ve almost finished the syllabus! So this week we looked again at the use of “have to/ must / don’t have to” BUT in the past tense.
HAD TO is the
Past tense of must / have to
I wasn’t at the lesson yesterday because I had to go to the doctor!
CAN/ CAN’T also express possibility/permission or not to do something!
|Obligation (MUST/ HAVE TO)||You MUST/HAVE TO eat 5 pieces of fruit a day.||PROHIBITION MUSTN’T||You MUSTN’T drink that water.|
|Rules (have to)||In GB YOU HAVE TO drive on the left.|
|Possibility/permission Can||YOU CAN smoke here!||PROHIBITIONCan’t||You CAN’T smoke in here!|
|NOT NECESSARYDON’T HAVE TO(DIDN’T HAVE TO)||John DOESN’T HAVE TO get up tomorrow. It’s a holiday!|
|COULD||When I was a child, I COULD eat anything I liked and I never put on weight.||COULDN’T||When I was a child I COULDN’T stay out all night!|
|HAD TO||I wasn’t at school yesterday because I HAD TO go to the dentist!|
Then we had a look at relative pronouns.
WHO/THAT/WHICH are relative pronouns.
I know a man. He can speak Japanese. = I know a man WHO can speak Japanese.
WHO is used for people NOT things but you can say: (I know a man THAT can speak Japanese) (WHO is more frequent)
THAT is used for people and things
I have a watch. It is very old. = I have a watch WHICH is very old.
(I have a watch THAT is very old ) .
Use of where: The hotel where we stayed was very expensive.
Please note that our final lesson 13.12.2011 by popular demand will be in the morning at 11 in Aula 15. You will need to cofirm that you are coming during lessons next week!
See you soon!
Humana.Mente – Journal of Philosophical Studies – www.humanamente.eu
Editors: Francesca Ervas – Elisabetta Gola
The Experimental Turn in Philosophical Pragmatics
Modern pragmatics has been defined as “philosophical”, not only because its main representative authors, such as Grice and Austin, were philosophers of ordinary language, but also because it has used linguistic and philosophical analysis as a method to give an explanation of communicative features of language. However, in the last years, plenty of studies have brought classical pragmatic theories in front of the tribunal of experience, to test their power of explanation and prediction. The result has been the growth of a flourishing interdiscipline, called “Experimental Pragmatics”, which claims that understanding an utterance requires the access to the speaker’s intention in specific contexts and uses experimental techniques coming from psycholinguistics, cognitive sciences and psychology to bring to light the comprehension mechanisms of non-literal and figurative language. The objective of this issue is to discuss the main empirical results of Experimental Pragmatics and to explore its theoretical influence on “philosophical” pragmatics in its most important research subjects, such as figures of speech, implicatures, etc. How and to what extent do experimental method and conceptual analysis interact in pragmatics? Which consequences does this experimental turn have for theorizing in pragmatics?
This issue of Humana.Mente welcomes contributions addressing these and related themes, including:
Presuppositions vs. Implications
Lexical Disambiguation and Reference Resolution
The Pragmatics of Discourse
Evidence of the Explicit/Implicit Distinction
Processing of Implicatures
How Metonymy works
Production and Perception of Jokes and Humor
Papers should be submitted in blind review format. Please omit any self-identifying information within the abstract and body of the paper.
Furthermore, we invite to submit reviews of recent books (published after 2009), and commentaries of articles and books (also published before 2009) that could be particularly interesting for the topics analysed in this Issue.
Paper and review submissions should adhere to the following guidelines:
(2) Instructions for authors:
Deadline for submissions: May 2nd, 2012.
Notification of acceptance: August 1st, 2012
Final version due: October 1, 2012
(3) Papers should not exceed 42.000 characters in either Microsoft Word or Rich Text format and should include an abstract of no more than 150 words.