Статті в журналах з теми "Misquoting"

The paper focuses on the phenomenon of quoting Confucius, the classical Chinese thinker of the Western Zhou Dynasty. Firstly, it approaches the core issue of quotes and historicity of the “master said” narrative which marked the tradition of quoting Confucius and understanding his heritage through the form of quotes. In the core part of the paper, a selection of ten quotes that most commonly circulate on the Internet are analysed and traced to their most probable sources, while the paper then concludes by approaching the problem of misquoting from a historical and philosophical point of view.

“I write for friends and strangers.” So writes Stanley Cavell in Little Did I Know, misquoting Gertrude Stein (who in fact wrote for herself and for strangers). Cavell long wrestled with uncertainty about how his books would be—and had been—received, with whether he could make himself understood to his readers. The friends who share his conviction that everything—art, language, autobiography—matters, and that we must try as best we can to communicate with others. The strangers whose minds are more mysterious still, but to whom he felt a duty to reach out. On the occasion of the publication of our respective books, Stanley Cavell and Film: Scepticism and Self-Reliance at the Cinema (Bloomsbury, 2019) and Stanley Cavell and The Arts: Philosophy and Popular Culture (Bloomsbury, 2020), we read one another’s work and were moved to begin a conversation. Here, we speak to each another about finding Cavell, the tricky business of interpretation and the future of Cavell studies.

Chapters 6 and 7 of the pseudo-Aristotelian treatise On the Cosmos (Περὶ κόσμου = De mundo) display ‘a series of well-crafted and carefully organized analogies’ in order to represent the power of god pervading the whole universe. The last analogy (400b14–28), which is by far the most important in this section, compares the rule of god over the world to the rule of the law in a Greek city (ὁ τῆς πόλεως νόμος). As shown by the author in the previous analogies, the perfect order of the universe is the result of the continuous creation and dissolution of single things: this process—based upon the harmony of opposites—is the keystone of the eternity and equilibrium of our world. Similarly, the law is the unmoved (ἀκίνητος) mover of every activity and experience in the city: both positive and negative situations involving single citizens contribute to the supreme order and stability of the city. Positive examples include the activity of rulers, officials and members of the assemblies (ἄρχοντες, θεσμοθέται, βουλευταί, ἐκκλησιασταί), whereas negative examples include those who go to trial defending themselves (ὁ δὲ πρὸς τοὺς δικαστὰς ἀπολογησόμενος) and those who are imprisoned and destined to capital punishment (ὁ δὲ εἰς τὸ δεσμωτήριον ἀποθανούμενος). In spite of their difference, all of these actions are due to one single order (κατὰ μίαν πρόσταξιν), that is, the civic law, which ensures the stability of the city. To stress and illustrate this concordia discors, which characterizes both the city and the universe, the author of the treatise closes the passage with a quotation from Sophocles’ Oedipus Tyrannus (lines 4–5):πόλις δ' ὁμοῦ μὲν θυμιαμάτων γέμει,ὁμοῦ δὲ παιάνων τε καὶ στεναγμάτωνThe author reads these verses as a perfect example of a context characterized by opposite situations: in fact, the city is full of paeans (παιάνων), which are interpreted as ‘songs of joy and relief’, and, at the same time, it is also full of laments and mourns (στεναγμάτων). The same interpretation can be found in the Latin translation of the treatise, which gives even more emphasis to the opposition between life and death: uideasque illam ciuitatem pariter spirantem Panchaeis odoribus et graueolentibus caenis, resonantem hymnis et carminibus et canticis, eandem etiam lamentis et ploratibus heiulantem.

Despite a growing interest in the field of neuroeducation, it is widely accepted that attempts to establish interdisciplinary links between education and neuroscience can also lead to misunderstanding and miscommunication. Errors arising from misreading, misunderstanding or misquoting information about the brain and its functions are called neuromyths. Educational neuromyths, on the other hand, are defined as widely accepted erroneous beliefs that contribute to pseudo-scientific practices in educational settings, resulting from a misunderstanding of neuroscience. Neuromyths seen as a problem existing in educational environments for many reasons such as causing false truths in education and training, causing ineffective teaching, wasting important resources such as effort, time and money to be used for effective teaching practices, negatively affecting the reliability of the teaching profession and neuroscience research. For this reason, it is stated that neuromyths should be detected and eliminated. The purpose of this article is to give information about the causes of neuromyths, the importance of neuromyths in education, and how to eliminate neuromyths, by looking at neuromyths that cause problems in education from an educational point of view.

In his April 2003 PS: Political Science and Politics article “Marbury v. Madison: How John Marshall Changed History by Misquoting the Constitution,” Winfield H. Rose presents an argument in which Chief Justice Marshall knowingly distorted the meaning of the Constitution for strategic gain. The strategic gain was the creation of judicial review (the power of the Court to invalidate acts of other branches of government as violative of the Constitution). The key means to achieve this goal was to intentionally misquote Article III in the Court's most famous of cases, Marbury v. Madison (1803). Rose offers his argument as the product of a new discovery (that of detecting Marshall's misquotation), and this discovery as the product of a fresh reading of the case. The reading is a “fresh” one because Rose looks anew at the actual text of the decision and does not rely on the accepted “textbook wisdom” of the case. He calls us rightly to revisit the case and follow him beyond the “conventional textbook wisdom” regarding the case. However, Rose's analysis fails in the end precisely because it remains so wedded to the textbook wisdom on Marbury and judicial review that he advises against.

BackgroundPeople bereaved by suicide are often reported to be distressed by media reporting. Current media guidelines for reporting suicide focus especially on prevention of copycat behaviour.AimsTo explore bereaved individuals' experiences of media reporting after suicide and to examine their priorities in relation to media guidelines.MethodIn-depth interviews with 40 people bereaved by suicide, with qualitative analysis. Review of four guidelines.ResultsThere is a difference of emphasis between guidance for the press that aims to prevent copycat suicides (especially avoidance of details such as method used) and the perspectives of bereaved people (who prioritise sympathetic and accurate reporting, sometimes including details of the death and images of the person who died). We found that bereaved relatives were sometimes keen to talk to the press. Those who were upset by the press focused on careless reporting, misquoting and speculation that gave an inaccurate impression of the death.ConclusionsThe Leveson Inquiry has drawn attention to the damage that can be caused by irresponsible journalism. Guidelines written to prevent ‘copycat’ suicides are important, but so are the needs of bereaved relatives. Because accuracy matters greatly to the bereaved, families should be able to work with an intermediary such as a police press officer to prepare a statement for the press to minimise the risk of misrepresentation.

We thank Ms. Horne et al. for the clarification of our misquoting of their paper (Wood et al., 2016). They clarify that 21% of their overall sample of patients with Parkinson's disease (PD-MCI) converted to dementia in over four years, which we erroneously attributed to the mild cognitive impairment (MCI) group in our discussion (McDermott et al., 2017). This was virtually identical to our overall conversion rate of 20%. Their conversion rate of patients with PD-MCI, as defined by two cognitive tests impaired (1.5 SD) within a single cognitive domain, was 51%, whereas the conversion rate was 38% when the PD-MCI group included patients with impairment within and between cognitive domains. Their conversion rates are similar to our rate of 42% (as defined with 1.5 SD impairment within or across domains) and the rate of 39% in a study with five-years of follow-up of incident cases (Pedersen et al., 2017). Our overall conversion occurred over a slightly shorter time span. In addition to conversion rates, all the studies acknowledge that some patients can revert to normal cognitive status, which varies based on classification criteria and length of follow-up. Comparable conversion across studies using similar criteria is reassuring and can encourage planning of targeted interventions (Hoogland et al., 2017).

Abstract. Structural studies in active caldera systems are widely used in geothermal exploration to reconstruct volcanological conceptual models. Active calderas are difficult settings to perform such studies mostly because of the highly dynamic environment, dominated by fast accumulation of primary and secondary volcanic deposits, the variable and transient rheology of the shallow volcanic pile, and the continuous feedbacks between faulting, secondary porosity creation, and geothermal fluid circulation, alteration and cementation that tend to obliterate the tectonic deformation structures. In addition, deformation structures can be also caused by near- and far-field stress regimes, which include magmatic intrusions at various depths, the evolving topography and regional tectonics. A lack of consideration of all these factors may severely underpin the reliability of structural studies. By rebutting and providing a detailed discussion of all the points raised by the comment of Norini and Groppelli (2020) to the Urbani et al. (2020) paper, we take the opportunity to specify the scientific rationale of our structural fieldwork and strengthen its relevance for geothermal exploration and exploitation in active caldera geothermal systems in general and, particularly, for the Holocene history of deformation and geothermal circulation in the Los Humeros caldera. At the same time, we identify several major flaws in the approach and results presented in Norini and Groppelli (2020), such as (1) the lack of an appropriate ranking of the deformation structures considering an inventory method for structural analysis; (2) the misinterpretation and misquoting of Urbani et al. (2020) and other relevant scientific literature; and (3) irrelevant and contradictory statements within their comment.

معجم المصطلحات المقاصدية، إعداد: عبد النور بزا، وجميلة تلوت، ومحمد عبدو، بإشراف أحمد الريسوني، لندن: مركز دراسات مقاصد الشريعة الإسلامية، في مؤسسة الفرقان للتراث الإسلامي، 2017م، 1128 صفحة. تأصيل فقه الأولويات وتطبيقاته في مجال حفظ الدين في السياسة الشرعية، محمد همام عبد الرحيم ملحم، الرياض: مؤسسة البيان، 2015م، 457 صفحة. مقصد الحرية وتطبيقاته في الفقه السياسي الإسلامي، فتحي أبو الورد، بيروت: الدار الشامية للطباعة والنشر والتوزيع، 2017م، 734 صفحة. نقد الفكر المقاصدي عند الشيخ محمد الطاهر بن عاشور، محمد المدنيني، ألمانيا: نور للنشر والتوزيع، 2017م، 252 صفحة. الفنون في ضوء مقاصد الشريعة الإسلامية، تحرير إبراهيم البيومي غانم، لندن: مركز دراسات مقاصد الشريعة الإسلامية في مؤسسة الفرقان للتراث الإسلامي، 2017م، 542 صفحة. الخلافة الثانية على منهاج النبوة، سعيدة أولاد موح الصديق، المغرب: نشرت بشكل مستقل، 2017م، 389 صفحة. أطلس تاريخ الأنبياء والرسل صلوات الله وسلامه عليهم، سامي بن عبد المغلوث، الرياض: مكتبة العبيكان، 2017م، 320 صفحة. العقل والاستدلال العقلي عند المتكلمين، تيسير أحميد عبل الركابي، بيروت: الرافدين، 2017م، 172صفحة. علم الكلام الإسلامي – دراسة في القواعد المنهجية، رضا برنجار، بيروت: مركز الحضارة لتنمية الفكر الإنساني، 2016م، 244 صفحة. فلسفة الدين، مارتن. و. ف. ستون، ترجمة: سهيل نجم، دمشق: صفحات للدراسات والنشر، 2017م، 160 صفحة. حقائق عن التصوف، عبد القادر عيسى، بيروت: دار إحياء التراث، 2016م، 566 صفحة. التصوف العقلي في اليهودية والمسيحية والإسلام، سامي السهم، بيروت: دار الكتاب اللبناني للطباعة والنشر والتوزيع، 2016م، 525 صفحة. Shari'a Law and Modern Muslim Ethics, Robert W. Hefner, Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 2016, 312 pages. The Sociology of Islam: Knowledge, Power and Civility, Armando Salvatore, Wiley, 2016, 344 pages. Philosophy in the Islamic World: A history of philosophy without any gaps, by Peter Adamson, Oxford University Press, 2016, 280 pages. Religion as Critique: Islamic Critical Thinking from Mecca to the Marketplace (Islamic Civilization and Muslim Networks), by Irfan Ahmad. Chapel Hill, NC: The University of North Carolina Press, 2017, 300 Pages. Misquoting Muhammad: The Challenge and Choices of Interpreting the Prophet's Legacy, by Jonathan A.C. Brown, Oneworld Publications, 2015, 384 pages. The Power of Praying Through Fear, by Stormie Omartian, Harvest House Publishers, 2017, 224 pages. Islamic Spirituality: Theology and Practice for the Modern World, by Zeki Saritoprak, Bloomsbury Academic, 2017, 248 pages. للحصول على كامل المقالة مجانا يرجى النّقر على ملف ال PDF في اعلى يمين الصفحة.

Introduction. Recent education researches in different countries have shown that knowledge and ideas of teachers about the development and functioning of the brain do not correspond to or even contradict the recent data of neurobiology. These beliefs, called neuromyths, are the result of misunderstandings, misinterpretations, and misquoting of scientifically based facts about the development and functioning of the brain. The high prevalence of neuromyths accompanied by high interest in neurobiological researches and their potential application in education can be considered as risk factors involved with the development of learning theories and teaching methods. Moreover, neuromyths can lead to potential risks to children’s physical and mental health. The purposes of this work are to assess the knowledge and perceptions of Russian teachers at different educational levels (from preschool to university-level), investigate prevalence and predictors of neuromyths among them, and to identify the ‘risk zone’ in their knowledge which requires critical evaluation. Materials and Methods. This study is based on the questionnaire developed by P.A. Howard-Jones et al. to assess the level of neurobiological knowledge among teachers (modified by the authors of this article). The sample comprised 8455 teachers from 1539 educational institutions in 10 regions of the Russian Federation. The obtained data were processed by methods of mathematical statistics using correlation, variances and factor analysis. Results. The study has found that teachers’ interest in neuroscience is combined with insufficient knowledge about brain development and a great number of false beliefs (neuromyths) about opportunities of applying neurobiological approaches to education. The research has revealed the most common neuromyths, which do not correlate with participants’ age, work experience and disciplines they teach. The analysis of the reasons for the emergence of false ideas about brain functioning is carried out. The correct interpretation of the present neurobiological knowledge in teaching is given. It has been shown that the prevalence of false knowledge in the neurobiological field does not differ significantly between countries. The misconceptions that underlie neuromyths often become the basis for remedial recommendations aimed at solving children’s developmental problems. Unfortunately, the recommendations based on neuromyths delay the time of effective support and can produce negative results. The quantitative and qualitative analyses of teachers’ knowledge and misconceptions about the brain development and functioning enabled the authors to identify a range of issues that require a critical assessment in terms of their usefulness before developing new educational approaches and teaching methods. Conclusions. This interdisciplinary research found that teachers have insufficient, fragmentary and unsystematic knowledge in the field of neurobiology and demonstrate low awareness of recent scientific facts about brain development and cognitive activities regardless of work experience, age and specialization. Insufficient knowledge and false beliefs is the basis of trust in neuromyths and is the ‘risk zone’ for teaching activities because they both lead to incorrect and ineffective teaching practices. Moreover, neuromyths can become potential mental and physical health risks for children. The obtained data can be used in teacher education and professional development programmes.

Eugenia quilombola, a new species restricted to the northern portion of the Atlantic Forest is here described. Its sheets were previously misidentified as Eugenia umbrosa and this misquoting name have been used in scientific collections and publications until now. After 10 years of studies and discussions about its identity, Eugenia quilombola was recognized as a new taxon based on its diagnostic features of multilocular anthers and verrucose fruits (vs. rimose anther and smooth fruit in E. umbrosa). Furthermore, Eugenia quilombola has a narrow distribution in northeastern Brazil while E. umbrosa occurs in the southeastern region and in the state of Bahia.

This paper reviews and synthesizes corporate finance and financial intermediation literature by highlighting transaction costs as a determining factor in their evolution. It then introduces blockchain as a potentially powerful technology that can significantly reduce transaction costs and therefore affect the structure of corporations and financial intermediaries. Modern corporations strive to coordinate functions internally to minimize transaction costs. And financial intermediaries attempt to resolve the information asymmetry problem among transacting parties. Over time, however, corporations and financial intermediation have been settled with the remaining incentive problems and their associated costs. For example, some financial intermediaries have committed fraud by timing their trades ahead of their customers, others by misquoting interest rates, and a few by fleecing customers by issuing unwanted credit cards. Regulators protecting customers often appear to be one step behind in preempting these intermediaries from wrongdoing. After introducing blockchain technology and explaining how it works, this paper examines the application of blockchain in real-estate finance, demonstrating how it can reduce or eliminate the role of multiple intermediaries in executing transactions.

This paper investigates allegations of SARFAH (i.e., God enjoining Arabs not to come by a speech like the Qur'an, or else, they would have) on the part of certain writers. The researcher asserts such allegations have been unfounded, without correct evidence, and lacking a reasonable basis. Allegations have been the result of misquoting or abstracting out of the text. Paper also discusses some of the Mu'tazilah (i.e., standing a part) known for false belief. An objective of the research is to exonerate some of the accused of Ahl-Assunah (i.e, people of the right road, so to speak), by doing which, the researcher hopes to have laid down in this context, the scientific bases of research, for to make writers say what they have not, is a crime against knowledge and all who traffic in it. يتحدث هذا البحث عن علماء اتهموا بالقول بالصرفة، وهي أن الله تعالى صرف العرب عن الإتيان بمثل القرآن الكريم، ولولا ذلك لجاءوا بمثله، وقد كان اتهام هؤلاء العلماء من غير دليل صحيح، أو مستند علمي يحتج به، أو يعول عليه، وكثير من هذه الاتهامات كان سببها عدم دقة النقل، واجتزاء النصوص، وعدم استيفاء أقوال العلماء في السياق الذي وردت فيه، وقد شمل البحث بعض مَن اتُّهِم بالصرفة من المعتزلة ممن عُرِف بفساد الاعتقاد؛ لأن الغرض من البحث إضافة لتبرئة المتهمين من أهل السنّة: التطبيق العملي لقواعد البحث العلمي في نسبة الأقوال والآراء إلى أصحابها، فتقويل العلماء ما لم يقولوا فيه جناية على العِلم والعلماء.

Welcome to a Special Issue of the International Journal for Educational Integrity: Best papers from the Plagiarism Across Europe and Beyond Conference, Brno, Czech Republic, 12–13 June 2013. The IJEI acknowledges the generous collaboration and collegial support of the organisers of the conference, particularly Tomas Foltýnek (Conference Convenor) and Irene Glendinning, Project Leader of the Impact of Policies for Plagiarism in Higher Education across Europe Project (IPPHEAE). Selected 'best papers' were submitted to the IJEI for consideration and additional double-blind peer review. As a result of subsequent revisions, the papers in this issue are substantially different from the original versions presented at the Czech conference. We open the issue with an overview and summary of results from the IPPHEAE by Project Leader Irene Glendinning from Coventry University, UK. Funded by the European Commission (2010–2013), the IPPHEAE is possibly the broadest study of academic integrity in Europe ever conducted, with a comparative study of academic integrity policies and procedures in higher education institutions (HEIs) across 27 European Union member states. The project used online questionnaires, student focus groups, structured interviews and analysis of documentary evidence to determine how well institutional procedures were understood, to what extent they were operating as intended and whether there was consistency of outcomes within and between institutions. Almost 5,000 responses were received in 14 different languages. Participants included students (at undergraduate and masters' levels), teaching staff and senior managers. Glendinning presents results from the survey that focused specifically on institutional policies and highlights examples of good practice as well as areas of concern. In keeping with international research from other settings and locations, the IPPHEAE findings indicate that there is no 'one size fits all' approach to academic integrity policy and practice. Each country and indeed each HEI needs to develop a tailored approach according to individual context, and taking into account the maturity of existing policies and systems. IPPHEAE project partners Tomáš Foltýnek and Jirí Rybicka from Mendel University, Czech Republic, and Catherine Demoliou from the University of Nicosia, Cyprus, use data obtained from the project survey to address the question: 'Do students think what teachers think about plagiarism?'. The researchers compare and contrast the overall data on students' and teachers' attitudes to academic writing, their perceptions of plagiarism and plagiarism penalties, and their knowledge of institutional policies/ procedures on plagiarism. Results indicate that there is a discrepancy in understanding between these two key stakeholder groups relating to how students learn about academic integrity, the challenges of academic writing, the causes of student plagiarism, identifying plagiarism, appropriate penalties for plagiarism, and knowledge of institutional policy. The authors contend that teachers' attitudes may require reflection and realignment to ensure they have a better understanding of students' educational needs and perceptions of plagiarism so that appropriate support can be offered. In the third paper, Rui Sousa-Silva from Universidade do Porto, Portugal, uses a forensic linguistics approach to analyse real-life plagiarism cases by higher education students. The author compares suspected plagiarised strings of text against the most likely original text, and demonstrates that strategies other than literal borrowing (wordfor- word text) are being increasingly used by students to plagiarise. Sousa-Silva provides examples to illustrate why existing automated text-matching software may fail to detect these cases of plagiarism. The paper concludes that while text-matching software is able to detect literal, verbatim plagiarism, it should not necessarily be considered a good 'plagiarism detection system' particularly when other strategies are used, such as translation, word substitution or reordering. The author also reminds us of the need for manual analysis by a 'human detector' to ensure that any accusations of plagiarism take into account both the linguistic and educational complexity underlying textual similarities. Finally, Sousa-Silva calls for more research and improvements in computational linguistics and natural language processing to increase the accuracy and reliability of the machine-detection procedure. In addition to the burgeoning international research on student plagiarism, Erja Moore, from Karelia University of Applied Sciences, Finland, suggests that accuracy of referencing might be another useful aspect to explore when examining students' writing practices. Moore analyses both the accuracy of referencing and plagiarism in 91 electronically published theses published in the Finnish Theseus database. In-text citations were compared to references, and in the case of frequent inaccuracy a Google search was used to scrutinise possible plagiarism. The accuracy of referencing was categorised into four classifications: accurate, some inaccuracy, constant inaccuracy and misleading referencing/plagiarism. Moore provides useful examples of inaccuracy, misquoting and plagiarism and also points to 'secondary source plagiarism', which occurs when text with accurate citations and references is copied from the original source and presented as the student's own. The analysis in Moore's study indicated that nearly one third (31%) of theses had major referencing inaccuracies, or referencing which could be categorised as misleading or plagiarised. It is clear from this study that constant inaccuracy and misleading referencing are categories that overlap with plagiarism. The results of Moore's study require careful consideration because they demonstrate that in Finnish higher education theses containing major inaccuracies have been accepted and published. The title of the conference Plagiarism Across Europe and Beyond points to the widespread interest in the topic of plagiarism, well beyond Europe. Robert Craig and David Dalton, from the Petroleum Institute, Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates, investigated the perceptions of first-year students concerning the proportion and frequency of cheating among their peers, as well as the main reasons for cheating behaviour. Their findings demonstrated that at the start of the undergraduate programme, three quarters to four fifths of the students viewed copying as serious or very serious, but after only one semester this percentage had dropped considerably for some areas. The data established that there was a clear problem in need of a remedy. The authors provide details of how the Communications Department of the Petroleum Institute facilitated a new, enquiry-based approach which facilitated student engagement, ownership and buy-in and which ultimately had a mitigating effect on copying and plagiarism. The authors make recommendations based on the experiences of their successful programme. In particular, they advocate for crossdepartmental collaboration, a consistent institutional voice on academic integrity, and curriculum based on experiential and enquiry-based learning. Taking the lessons on academic integrity in the UK to countries outside Europe is the central theme in the final paper by Stephen Gow, University of York, UK. Gow's research was based on interviews with ten Mainland Chinese master's students who had studied at a UK university and then returned to work at joint-venture educational institution in Shanghai. Gow examined participants' accounts of plagiarism and compared and contrasted the experience of plagiarism in Chinese and British educational contexts. He anticipated that the study would uncover the extent to which returnee scholars transmit academic integrity and the concept of plagiarism when returning to work in transnational education in China. The findings, using the qualitative methodology of interpretative repertoires, suggest that the participants used UK institutional vocabulary and developed a strict approach to plagiarism and academic integrity during their master's courses and in their subsequent educational careers. Furthermore, the participants in the study were able to "act as linguistic and cultural interpreters, promoting institutional relationships", despite some of the complexities of living, studying and working in two such different cultural and educational environments. Gow suggests that having moved between and adapting to these contexts, with appropriate support these returning Chinese graduates have the potential to act as a cultural bridge for academic integrity within internationalised higher education. I trust you will discover new insights in this Special Issue of the International Journal for Educational Integrity as it provides a broad range of perspectives on academic integrity in the many contexts of Europe, and well beyond. Tracey Bretag, IJEI Editor June 2014

Many years ago, while studying in Paris as a novice postgraduate, I was invited to accompany a friend to a seminar with Jacques Derrida. I leapt at the chance even though I was only just learning French. Although I tried hard to follow the discussion, the extent of my participation was probably signing the attendance sheet. Afterwards, caught up on the edges of a small crowd of acolytes in the foyer as we waited out a sudden rainstorm, Derrida turned to me and charmingly complimented me on my forethought in predicting rain, pointing to my umbrella. Flustered, I garbled something in broken French about how I never forgot my umbrella, how desolated I was that he had mislaid his, and would he perhaps desire mine? After a small silence, where he and the other students side-eyed me warily, he declined. For years I dined on this story of meeting a celebrity academic, cheerfully re-enacting my linguistic ineptitude. Nearly a decade later I was taken aback when I overheard a lecturer in philosophy at the University of Sydney re-telling my encounter as a witty anecdote, where an early career academic teased Derrida with a masterful quip, quoting back to him his own attention to someone else’s quote. It turned out that Spurs, one of Derrida’s more obscure early essays, employs an extended riff on an inexplicable citation found in inverted commas in the margins of Nietzsche’s papers: “J’ai oublié mon parapluie” (“I have forgotten my umbrella”). My clumsy response to a polite enquiry was recast in a process of Chinese whispers in my academic community as a snappy spur-of-the-moment witticism. This re-telling didn’t just selectively edit my encounter, but remixed it with a meta-narrative that I had myself referenced, albeit unknowingly. My ongoing interest in the more playful breaches of scholarly conventions of quotation and attribution can be traced back to this incident, where my own presentation of an academic self was appropriated and remixed from fumbler to quipster. I’ve also been struck throughout my teaching career by the seeming disconnect between the stringent academic rules for referencing and citation and the everyday strategies of appropriation that are inherent to popular remix culture. I’m taking the opportunity in this paper to reflect on the practice of scholarly quotation itself, before examining some recent creative provocations to the academic ‘author’ situated inventively at the crossroad between scholarly convention and remix culture. Early in his own teaching career at Oxford University Lewis Carroll, wrote to his younger siblings describing the importance of maintaining his dignity as a new tutor. He outlines the distance his college was at pains to maintain between teachers and their students: “otherwise, you know, they are not humble enough”. Carroll playfully describes the set-up of a tutor sitting at his desk, behind closed doors and without access to today’s communication technologies, relying on a series of college ‘scouts’ to convey information down corridors and staircases to the confused student waiting for instruction below. The lectures, according to Carroll, went something like this: Tutor: What is twice three?Scout: What’s a rice-tree?Sub-scout: When is ice free?Sub-sub-scout: What’s a nice fee??Student (timidly): Half a guinea.Sub-sub-scout: Can’t forge any!Sub-scout: Ho for jinny!Scout: Don’t be a ninny!Tutor (looking offended, tries another question): Divide a hundred by twelve.Scout: Provide wonderful bells!Sub-scout: Go ride under it yourself!Sub-sub-scout: Deride the dunderhead elf!Pupil (surprised): What do you mean?Sub-sub-scout: Doings between!Sub-scout: Blue is the screen!Scout: Soup tureen! And so the lecture proceeds… Carroll’s parody of academic miscommunication and misquoting was reproduced by Pierre Bourdieu at the opening of the book Academic Discourse to illustrate the failures of pedagogical practice in higher education in the mid 1960s, when he found scholarly language relied on codes that were “destined to dazzle rather than to enlighten” (3). Bourdieu et al found that students struggled to reproduce appropriately scholarly discourse and were constrained to write in a badly understood and poorly mastered language, finding reassurance in what he called a ‘rhetoric of despair’: “through a kind of incantatory or sacrificial rite, they try to call up and reinstate the tropes, schemas or words which to them distinguish professorial language” (4). The result was bad writing that karaoke-ed a pseudo academic discourse, accompanied by a habit of thoughtlessly patching together other peoples’ words and phrases. Such sloppy quoting activities of course invite the scholarly taboo of plagiarism or its extreme opposite, hypercitation. Elsewhere, Jacques Derrida developed an important theory of citationality and language, but it is intriguing to note his own considerable unease with conventional acknowledgement practices, of quoting and being quoted: I would like to spare you the tedium, the waste of time, and the subservience that always accompany the classic pedagogical procedures of forging links, referring back to past premises or arguments, justifying one’s own trajectory, method, system, and more or less skilful transitions, re-establishing continuity, and so on. These are but some of the imperatives of classical pedagogy with which, to be sure, one can never break once and for all. Yet, if you were to submit to them rigorously, they would very soon reduce you to silence, tautology and tiresome repetition. (The Ear of the Other, 3) This weariness with a procedural hyper-focus on referencing conventions underlines Derrida’s disquiet with the self-protecting, self-promoting and self-justifying practices that bolster pedagogical tradition and yet inhibit real scholarly work, and risk silencing the authorial voice. Today, remix offers new life to quoting. Media theorist Lev Manovich resisted the notion that the practice of ‘quotation’ was the historical precedent for remixing, aligning it instead to the authorship practice of music ‘sampling’ made possible by new electronic and digital technology. Eduardo Navas agrees that sampling is the key element that makes the act of remixing possible, but links its principles not just to music but to the preoccupation with reading and writing as an extended cultural practice beyond textual writing onto all forms of media (8). A crucial point for Navas is that while remix appropriates and reworks its source material, it relies on the practice of citation to work properly: too close to the original means the remix risks being dismissed as derivative, but at the same time the remixer can’t rely on a source always being known or recognised (7). In other words, the conceptual strategies of remix must rely on some form of referencing or citation of the ideas it sources. It is inarguable that advances in digital technologies have expanded the capacity of scholars to search, cut/copy & paste, collate and link to their research sources. New theoretical and methodological frameworks are being developed to take account of these changing conditions of academic work. For instance, Annette Markham proposes a ‘remix methodology’ for qualitative enquiry, arguing that remix is a powerful tool for thinking about an interpretive and adaptive research practice that takes account of the complexity of contemporary cultural contexts. In a similar vein Cheré Harden Blair has used remix as a theoretical framework to grapple with the issue of plagiarism in the postmodern classroom. If, following Roland Barthes, all writing is “a tissue of quotations drawn from innumerable centers of culture” (146), and if all writing is therefore rewriting, then punishing students for plagiarism becomes problematic. Blair argues that since scholarly writing has become a mosaic of digital and textual productions, then teaching must follow suit, especially since teaching, as a dynamic, shifting and intertextual enterprise, is more suited to the digital revolution than traditional, fixed writing (175). She proposes that teachers provide a space in which remixing, appropriation, patch-writing and even piracy could be allowable, even useful and productive: “a space in which the line is blurry not because students are ignorant of what is right or appropriate, or because digital text somehow contains inherent temptations to plagiarise, but because digital media has, in fact, blurred the line” (183). The clashes between remix and scholarly rules of attribution are directly addressed by the pedagogical provocations of conceptual poet Kenneth Goldsmith, who has developed a program of ‘uncreative writing’ at the University of Pennsylvania, where, among other plagiaristic tasks, he forces students to transcribe whole passages from books, or to download essays from online paper mills and defend them as their own, marking down students who show a ‘shred of originality’. In his own writing and performances, which depend almost exclusively on strategies of appropriation, plagiarism and recontextualisation of often banal sources like traffic reports, Goldsmith says that he is working to de-familiarise normative structures of language. For Goldsmith, reframing language into another context allows it to become new again, so that “we don’t need the new sentence, the old sentence re-framed is good enough”. Goldsmith argues for the role of the contemporary academic and creative writer as an intelligent agent in the management of masses of information. He describes his changing perception of his own work: “I used to be an artist, then I became a poet; then a writer. Now when asked, I simply refer to myself as a word processor” (Perloff 147). For him, what is of interest to the twenty-first century is not so much the quote that ‘rips’ or tears words out of their original context, but finding ways to make new ‘wholes’ out of the accumulations, filterings and remixing of existing words and sentences. Another extraordinary example of the blurring of lines between text, author and the discursive peculiarities of digital media can be found in Jonathan Lethem’s essay ‘An Ecstasy of Influence: A Plagiarism’, which first appeared in Harpers Magazine in 2007. While this essay is about the topic of plagiarism, it is itself plagiarized, composed of quotes that have been woven seamlessly together into a composite whole. Although Lethem provides a key at the end with a list of his sources, he has removed in-text citations and quotation marks, even while directly discussing the practices of mis-quotation and mis-attribution throughout the essay itself. Towards the end of the essay can be found the paragraph: Any text is woven entirely with citations, references, echoes, cultural languages, which cut across it through and through in a vast stereophony. The citations that go to make up a text are anonymous, untraceable, and yet already read; they are quotations without inverted commas. The kernel, the soul — let us go further and say the substance, the bulk, the actual and valuable material of all human utterances — is plagiarism. …By necessity, by proclivity, and by delight, we all quote. Neurological study has lately shown that memory, imagination, and consciousness itself is stitched, quilted, pastiched. If we cut-and-paste ourselves, might we not forgive it of our artworks? (68) Overall, Lethem’s self-reflexive pro-plagiarism essay reminds the reader not only of how ideas in literature have been continuously recycled, quoted, appropriated and remixed, but of how open-source cultures are vital for the creation of new works. Lethem (re)produces rather than authors a body of text that is haunted by ever present/absent quotation marks and references. Zara Dinnen suggests that Lethem’s essay, like almost all contemporary texts produced on a computer, is a provocation to once again re-theorise the notion of the author, as not a rigid point of origin but instead “a relay of alternative and composite modes of production” (212), extending Manovich’s notion of the role of author in the digital age of being perhaps closest to that of a DJ. But Lethem’s essay, however surprising and masterfully intertextual, was produced and disseminated as a linear ‘static’ text. On the other hand, Mark Amerika’s remixthebook project first started out as a series of theoretical performances on his Professor VJ blog and was then extended into a multitrack composition of “applied remixology” that features sampled phrases and ideas from a range of artistic, literary, musical, theoretical and philosophical sources. Wanting his project to be received not as a book but as a hybridised publication and performance art project that appears in both print and digital forms, remixthebook was simultaneously published in a prestigious university press and a website that works as an online hub and teaching tool to test out the theories. In this way, Amerika expands the concept of writing to include multimedia forms composed for both networked environments and also experiments with what he terms “creative risk management” where the artist, also a scholar and a teacher, is “willing to drop all intellectual pretence and turn his theoretical agenda into (a) speculative play” (xi). He explains his process halfway through the print book: Other times we who create innovative works of remix artare fully self-conscious of the rival lineagewe spring forth fromand knowingly take on other remixological styles just to seewhat happens when we move insideother writers’ bodies (of work)This is when remixologically inhabitingthe spirit of another writer’s stylistic tendenciesor at least the subconsciously imagined writerly gesturesthat illuminate his or her live spontaneous performancefeels more like an embodied praxis In some ways this all seems so obvious to me:I mean what is a writer anyway buta simultaneous and continuous fusion ofremixologically inhabited bodies of work? (109) Amerika mashes up the jargon of academic writing with avant-pop forms of digital rhetoric in order to “move inside other writers’ bodies (of work)” in order to test out his theoretical agenda in an “embodied praxis” at the same time that he shakes up the way that contemporary scholarship itself is performed. The remixthebook project inevitably recalls one of the great early-twentieth century plays with scholarly quotation, Walter Benjamin’s The Arcades Project. Instead of avoiding conventional quoting, footnoting and referencing, these are the very fabric of Benjamin’s sprawling project, composed entirely of quotes drawn from nineteenth century philosophy and literature. This early scholarly ‘remixing’ project has been described as bewildering and oppressive, but which others still find relevant and inspirational. Marjorie Perloff, for instance, finds the ‘passages’ in Benjamin’s arcades have “become the digital passages we take through websites and YouTube videos, navigating our way from one Google link to another and over the bridges provided by our favourite search engines and web pages" (49). For Benjamin, the process of collecting quotes was addictive. Hannah Arendt describes his habit of carrying little black notebooks in which "he tirelessly entered in the form of quotations what daily living and reading netted him in the way of 'pearls' and 'coral'. On occasion he read from them aloud, showed them around like items from a choice and precious collection" (45). A similar practice of everyday hypercitation can be found in the contemporary Australian performance artist Danielle Freakley’s project, The Quote Generator. For what was intended in 2006 to be a three year project, but which is still ongoing, Freakley takes the delirious pleasure of finding and fitting the perfect quote to fit an occasion to an extreme. Unlike Benjamin, Freakley didn’t collect and collate quotes, she then relied on them to navigate her way through her daily interactions. As The Quote Generator, Freakley spoke only in quotations drawn from film, literature and popular culture, immediately following each quote with its correct in-text reference, familiar to academic writers as the ‘author/date’ citation system. The awkwardness and seeming artificiality of even short exchanges with someone who responds only in quotes might be bewildering enough, but the inclusion of the citation after the quote maddeningly interrupts and, at the same time, adds another metalevel to a conversation where even the simple platitude ‘thank you’ might be followed by an attribution to ‘Deep Throat 1972’. Longer exchanges become increasingly overwhelming, as Freakley’s piling of quote on quote, and sometimes repeating quotes, demands an attentive listener, as is evident in a 2008 interview with Andrew Denton on the ABC’s Enough Rope: Andrew Denton’s Enough Rope (2008) Denton: So, you’ve been doing this for three years??Freakley: Yes, Optus 1991Denton: How do people respond to you speaking in such an unnatural way?Freakley: It changes, David Bowie 1991. On the streets AKA Breakdance 1984, most people that I know think that I am crazy, Billy Thorpe 1972, a nigger like me is going insane, Cyprus Hill 1979, making as much sense as a Japanese instruction manual, Red Dwarf 1993. Video documentation of Freakley’s encounters with unsuspecting members of the public reveal how frustrating the inclusion of ‘spoken’ references can be, let alone how taken aback people are on realising they never get Freakley’s own words, but are instead receiving layers of quotations. The frustration can quickly turn hostile (Denton at one point tells Freakley to “shut up”) or can prove contaminatory, as people attempt to match or one-up her quotes (see Cook's interview 8). Apparently, when Freakley continued her commitment to the performance at a Perth Centerlink, the staff sent her to a psychiatrist and she was diagnosed with an obsessive-compulsive disorder, then prescribed medication (Schwartzkoff 4). While Benjamin's The Arcades Project invites the reader to scroll through its pages as a kind of textual flaneur, Freakley herself becomes a walking and talking word processor, extending the possibilities of Amerika’s “embodied praxis” in an inescapable remix of other people’s words and phrases. At the beginning of the project, Freakley organised a card collection of quotes categorised into possible conversation topics, and devised a ‘harness’ for easy access. Image: Danielle Freakley’s The Quote Generator harness Eventually, however, Freakley was able to rely on her own memory of an astounding number of quotations, becoming a “near mechanical vessel” (Gottlieb 2009), or, according to her own manifesto, a “regurgitation library to live by”: The Quote Generator reads, and researches as it speaks. The Quote Generator is both the reader and composer/editor. The Quote Generator is not an actor spouting lines on a stage. The Quote Generator assimilates others lines into everyday social life … The Quote Generator, tries to find its own voice, an understanding through throbbing collations of others, constantly gluttonously referencing. Much academic writing quotes/references ravenously. New things cannot be said without constant referral, acknowledgement to what has been already, the intricate detective work in the barking of the academic dog. By her unrelenting appropriation and regurgitating of quotations, Freakley uses sampling as a technique for an extended performance that draws attention to the remixology of everyday life. By replacing conversation with a hyper-insistence on quotes and their simultaneous citation, she draws attention to the artificiality and inescapability of the ‘codes’ that make up not just ordinary conversations, but also conventional academic discourse, what she calls the “barking of the academic dog”. Freakley’s performance has pushed the scholarly conventions of quoting and referencing to their furthest extreme, in what has been described by Daine Singer as a kind of “endurance art” that relies, in large part, on an antagonistic relationship to its audience. In his now legendary 1969 “Double Session” seminar, Derrida, too, experimented with the pedagogical performance of the (re)producing author, teasing his earnest academic audience. It is reported that the seminar began in a dimly lit room lined with blackboards covered with quotations that Derrida, for a while, simply “pointed to in silence” (177). In this seminar, Derrida put into play notions that can be understood to inform remix practices just as much as they do deconstruction: the author, originality, mimesis, imitation, representation and reference. Scholarly conventions, perhaps particularly the quotation practices that insist on the circulation of rigid codes of attribution, and are defended by increasingly out-of-date understandings of contemporary research, writing and teaching practices, are ripe to be played with. Remix offers an expanded discursive framework to do this in creative and entertaining ways. References Amerika, Mark. remixthebook. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2011. 29 July 2013 http://www.remixthebook.com/. Arendt, Hannah. “Walter Benjamin: 1892-1940.” In Illuminations. New York, NY: Shocken, 1969: 1-55. Barthes, Roland. “The Death of the Author.” Image Music Text. Trans Stephen Heath. New York: Hill and Wang, 1977: 142-148. Benjamin, Walter. The Arcades Project. Ed. Rolf Tiedemann, trans. Howard Eiland & Kevin McLaughlin. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1999. Blaire, Cheré Harden. “Panic and Plagiarism: Authorship and Academic Dishonesty in a Remix Culture.” Media Tropes 2.1 (2009): 159-192. Bourdieu, Pierre, Jean-Claude Passeron, and Monique de Saint Martin. Academic Discourse: Linguistic Misunderstanding and Professorial Power. Trans. Richard Teese. Stanford California: Stanford University Press, 1965. Carroll, Lewis (Charles Dodgson). “Letter to Henrietta and Edwin Dodgson 31 Jan 1855”. 15 July 2013 http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Letters_of_Lewis_Carroll. Cook, Richard. “Don’t Quote Me on That.” Time Out Sydney (2008): 8. http://rgcooke.wordpress.com/2008/02/13/interview-danielle-freakley.Denton, Andrew. “Interview: The Quote Generator.” Enough Rope. 29 Feb. 2008. ABC TV. 15 July 2013 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AsrGvwXsenE. Derrida, Jacques. Spurs, Nietzsche’s Styles. Trans. Barbara Harlow. London: University of Chicago Press, 1978. Derrida, Jacques. The Ear of the Other: Otobiography, Text, Transference. Trans Peggy Kampf. New York: Shocken Books, 1985. Derrida, Jacques. “The Double Session”. Dissemination. Trans Alan Bass, Chicago, University of Chicago Press, 1981. Dinnen, Zara. "In the Mix: The Potential Convergence of Literature and New Media in Jonathan Letham's 'The Ecstasy of Influence'". Journal of Narrative Theory 42.2 (2012). Freakley, Danielle. The Quote Generator. 2006 to present. 10 July 2013 http://www.thequotegenerator.com/. Goldsmith, Kenneth. Uncreative Writing. New York: University of Colombia Press 2011. Gottlieb, Benjamin. "You Shall Worship No Other Artist God." Art & Culture (2009). 15 July 2013 http://www.artandculture.com/feature/999. Lethem, Jonathan. “The Ecstasy of Influence: A Plagiarism.” Harper’s Magazine, Feb. 2007: 59-71. http://harpers.org/archive/2007/02/the-ecstasy-of-influence/. Manovich, Lev. "What Comes after Remix?" 2007. 15 July 2013 http://manovich.net/LNM/index.html. Markham, Annette. “Remix Methodology.” 2013. 9 July 2013 http://www.markham.internetinquiry.org/category/remix/.Morris, Simon (dir.). Sucking on Words: Kenneth Goldsmith. 2007. http://www.ubu.com/film/goldsmith_sucking.html.Navas, Eduardo. Remix Theory: The Aesthetics of Sampling. New York: Springer Wein, 2012. Perloff, Marjorie. Unoriginal Genius: Poetry by Other Means in the New Century. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2010. Schwartzkoff, Louise. “Art Forms Spring into Life at Prima Vera.” Sydney Morning Herald 19 Sep. 2008: Entertainment, 4. http://www.smh.com.au/news/entertainment/arts/art-forms-spring-into-life-at-primavera/2008/09/18/1221331045404.html.Singer, Daine (cur.). “Pains in the Artists: Endurance and Suffering.” Blindside Exhibition. 2007. 2 June 2013 http://www.blindside.org.au/2007/pains-in-the-artists.shtml.