Cortext platform

@article{Hoffman2018,

title = {The (Protestant) Bible, the (printed) sermon, and the word(s): The semantic structure of the Conformist and Dissenting Bible, 1660–1780},

author = {Mark Anthony Hoffman and Jean-Philippe Cointet and Philipp Brandt and Newton Key and Peter Bearman},

url = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.poetic.2017.11.002},

doi = {10.1016/j.poetic.2017.11.002},

year  = {2018},

date = {2018-06-01},

urldate = {2018-06-01},

journal = {Poetics},

volume = {68},

pages = {89-103},

abstract = {Using co-occurrence methods for identifying semantic structure in texts, we first describe the structure of the Protestant Bible, focusing on the ways in which contents of the Bible are organized in both the New and Old Testaments. We introduce a strategy for capturing the co-occurrence of nouns and verbs in windows defined by verses that progressively move across the text, from start to finish in a manner similar to reading. We then consider how Dissenters and Conformists used the Bible by locating Biblical verse in sermons printed in England during the period from 1660 to 1780. We describe how chapters are linked by themes over time, by dissenting and conformist religious communities, and map Dissenter and Conformist uses of the Bible onto its semantic structure. We show that it is possible to induce a semantic network image of the Bible, that this structure serves as a skeletal frame for interpretation, thereby highlighting different contents as central to denominations’ religious inspirations and concerns.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{Wezel2018b,

title = {Agroecology in Europe: Research, Education, Collective Action Networks, and Alternative Food Systems},

author = {Alexander Wezel and Julia Goette and Elisabeth Lagneaux and Gloria Passuello and Erica Reisman and Christophe Rodier and Grégoire Turpin},

url = {https://doi.org/10.3390/su10041214},

doi = {10.3390/su10041214},

year  = {2018},

date = {2018-04-17},

urldate = {2018-04-17},

journal = {Sustainability},

volume = {10},

number = {4},

pages = {1214},

abstract = {Agroecology is considered with different focus and weight in different parts of the world as a social and political movement, as science, and as practice. Despite its multitude of definitions, agroecology has begun in Europe to develop in different regional, national and continental networks of researchers, practitioners, advocates and movements. However, there is a lack of a comprehensive overview about these different developments and networks. Therefore, this paper attempts to document and provide a mapping of the development of European agroecology in its diverse forms. Through a literature review, interviews, active conference participation, and an extensive internet search we have collected information about the current state and development of agroecology in Europe. Agroecological research and higher education exist more in western and northern Europe, but farm schools and farmer-to-farmer training are also present in other regions. Today a large variety of topics are studied at research institutions. There is an increasing number of bottom-up agroecological initiatives and national or continental networks and movements. Important movements are around food sovereignty, access to land and seeds. Except for France, there are very few concrete policies for agroecology in Europe. Agroecology is increasingly linked to different fields of agri-food systems. This includes Community Supported Agriculture systems, but also agroecological territories, and some examples of labelling products. To amplify agroecology in Europe in the coming years, policy development will be crucial and proponents of agroecology must join forces and work hand-in-hand with the many stakeholders engaged in initiatives to develop more sustainable agriculture and food systems. View Full-Text},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{Munk2018,

title = {Genanvendt: Et kritisk tilbageblik på digitale metoders konsekvenser for kontroverskortlægningen},

author = {Anders Kristian Munk},

url = {https://rauli.cbs.dk/index.php/dansksociologi/article/view/5722/6370},

doi = {https://doi.org/10.22439/dansoc.v29i1.5722},

year  = {2018},

date = {2018-04-04},

urldate = {2018-04-04},

journal = {Tema: Digitale metoder},

volume = {29},

number = {1},

abstract = {Digitale metoders centrale postulat er, at vi kan genanvende nettets medier til at sige noget om samfundet i øvrigt. Det gælder ikke mindst indenfor kontroverskortlægningen,hvor digitale medier er blevet væsentlige skuepladser for diskussioner om ny viden og teknologi. Begrebet genanvendelse synes at indebære, at en eksisterende metodisk og analytisk tradition finder nye måder at bruge nogle redskaber på. Vi kan således have en tendens til at spørge, hvordan kontroverskortlægningen har fundet nye anvendelser for værktøjer til eksempelvis mønstergenkendelse eller automatiseret tekstanalyse. I denne artikel argumenterer jeg for, at vi bør stille spørgsmålet om genanvendelse anderledes. Efter 15 år i tæt parløb med nettets indfødte medier og metoder kan vi konstatere, at det også er kontroverskortlægningen selv, der har forandret sig; at det i nogen grad også er den metodiske og analytiske tradition, der er blevet genanvendt til nye formål og i sine nye redskabers billede.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{matos2018canyons,

title = {Canyons pride and prejudice: Exploring the submarine canyon research landscape, a history of geographic and thematic bias},

author = {Fábio L Matos and Steve W Ross and Veerle ann ida Huvenne and Jaime Davies and Marina R Cunha},

url = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pocean.2018.04.010},

doi = {10.1016/j.pocean.2018.04.010},

year  = {2018},

date = {2018-01-01},

urldate = {2018-01-01},

journal = {Progress in Oceanography},

publisher = {Elsevier},

abstract = {We mapped submarine canyon research using a scientometric approach to define and characterize its scientific landscape based on a comprehensive bibliographic dataset. The abundance of studies covering structural and functional aspects of submarine canyons allowed us to identify the existing knowledge clusters, historical trends, and emergent topics in canyon research. Our analysis documented a network of knowledge clusters of which four were particularly relevant: a strong cluster on “Geology & Geophysics”, well established since the beginnings of canyon research; a cluster on “Biology & Ecology” that gained strength primarily over the past two to three decades; a cluster on “Oceanographic Processes” which occupied a central position in the network and connected strongly to almost all the other clusters and especially to the fourth main cluster on “Modelling”. A smaller, but also well connected, cluster on “Biogeochemistry” related closely to “Biology & Ecology”, and three other small clusters (“Sedimentology”, “Sediments & Tidal Currents”, “Canyon Sampling”) bridged the main clusters. Finally, we identified three small, but specific satellite clusters (“Oil & Gas”, “Chemosynthetic Communities”, “Molecular & Symbionts”). The high-level structure of the knowledge network reflects a latent interdisciplinarity in canyon research. However, the evolution of the research lines over the past nine decades suggests that this pattern arose mostly in the new millennium. Emergent research topics in the last decade also reveal a concern regarding anthropogenic impacts and climate-driven processes. Our results also show a well implemented and international collaboration network, although research efforts have been mainly directed towards only a few canyon systems. A geographical and thematic bias also characterizes canyon research, with specific topics addressed preferentially in particular canyons by different leading research institutions. This spatial and thematic bias, together with the paucity of truly inter-disciplinary studies, may be the most important limitation to integrated knowledge and development in canyon research and hinders a global, more comprehensive understanding of canyon patterns and processes. The scientific landscape mapping and the complementary results are made available as an open and interactive platform that canyon stakeholders can use as a tool to identify knowledge gaps, to find key players in the global collaboration network and to facilitate planning of future research in submarine canyons.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}