Childhood obesity Research Paper Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1250 words

Childhood obesity - Research Paper Example Obesity is issue that has cropped up and is on the increase if prevention mechanisms are not put in place. It has become epidemic in many developed nations and especially in the United States. Statistics shows that about 58 million people are overweight and 40 million have been proved to be suffering from obese. This represents nearly one third of the Americas population. Related to the wellbeing of children, childhood obesity is one of main issues these days in almost every part of the world. This medical condition adversely affects the mental and physical health of children, as well as their level of self-confidence. On academic level, it puts an unpleasant impact on the mind and confidence of obese children because of which they usually do not show good academic performances (Sabia, 2007, p. 871). In developed countries, childhood obesity has become a serious health concern. Obese children usually do not perform well in their studies because they feel inferiority complex when their peers make fun of them. Their level of confidence and self-esteem go down as the result, which makes them unable to talk to their teachers and peers in a confident way. It is obvious that at school level, children are not as mentally mature as they get when they grow up. So they do not have any idea whether they are doing a good act by laughing at a comparatively fat fellow or not. They laugh at him/her, make fun, and call him/her by improper names because of which the confidence level of the targeted fellow goes down and he/she becomes unable to cope with the situation. This results in making the child self-conscious and less focused towards studies. Moreover, obese children feel low due to such situations because of which they participate neither in extra-curricular activities nor in classroom ac tivities. In extra-curricular activities, the participation of obese students is almost

Analysis of Linguistic Theory in Transpotting (1996)

Analysis of Linguistic Theory in Transpotting (1996) Introduction The main argument of this dissertation is that the language of John Hodges screenplay Trainspotting, even though it appears to contain sub-cultural social contexts, cannot be categorised within the framework of linguistic theory as representing a youth subculture. The verbal conflict formation in the text should be read as reflective of the larger worldview that verbal conflict behaviour is inevitable in all societies, as are the existence of social dialectsand the usage of common slang. 1. Gumperz Term: Speech Community In his 1982 volume Discourse strategies, John Gumperz discusses the concept of a speech community. He defines speech community as a system of organized diversity held together by common norms and aspirations. He also states that the speech community must form the starting point of linguistic analysis. He further states that although members of the same speech community may differ in terms of their beliefs and their behaviours, that this is a normal variation and has been shown to be a systematic regularity of communities. For, the most part, however, members of speech communities generally share norms of evaluation. Gumperz stresses the point that it is not the individual speakers of a language that make up a speech community. He cites the theories of Saussure and others of that time period to support this statement: It was believed that these reflect either momentary preferences, personal idiosyncrasies, or expressive or emotive tendencies, which rely on universal signalling mechani sms and are thus not part of the system of meaningful sounds by which substantive information is conveyed (11-12). According to Gumperz, although the ability to form grammatical statements is common to all speakers of a certain language, the more complex knowledge of contextualization convention varies widely. He also points out that contextualization is not something that can be attained through formal education or reading, but must be learned through face-to-face interactions. Discourse at this level is marked by conventions that reflect prolonged interactive experience by individuals cooperating in institutionalized settings in the pursuit of shared goals in friendship, occupational and similar networks of relationships (209). Language and social identity, a volume published in the same year, was co-authored by Jenny Cook-Gumperz. In this work, he discusses the role of communicative skills in our society, asserting that they have been radically altered. It is absolutely essential for individuals in todays society to be capable of managing or adapting to a variety of diverse communicative situations. In addition, they must be able to interact freely with people who are virtual strangers to them. These abilities are an absolute necessity if one is to acquire a sense of personal control and to establish a sense of order in ones life. The cause for this change, he asserts, is the bureaucratization of public institutions, which have become increasingly pervasive in our day-to-day lives. He sees this as a result of our post-industrial society and states that it exists in both Western and non-Western countries. The skills required to function at this level are far more complex, but must be mastered if one is to function autonomously as a member of a speech community. 2. Hallidays Notion: Antilanguages In Language as social semiotic: The social interpretation oflanguage and meaning, M.A.K. Halliday explains the initial acquisitionof language as part of the development of the child as a socialcreature: Language is the main channel through which the patterns ofliving are transmitted to him, through which he learns to act as amember of a â€Å"society† (9). The child does this, she goes on toexplain, through associations with family, neighbourhood, and varioussocial groups; these comprise the foundation on which the child baseshis or her belief systems and values. The child does not learn these things directly, but ratherindirectly, Halliday explains. It is through the accumulatedexperience of numerous small events, insignificant in themselves, inwhich his behaviour is guided and controlled, and in the course ofwhich he contracts and develops personal relationships of all kinds'(9). The unifying factor here is language; language is the mediumthrough which all of this takes place. She develops her discussion further by introducing the notion of anantisociety which is in direct contrast to society, describing theantisociety as a conscious alternative that can also be viewed as aform of resistance. This resistance can take a number of forms. It canbe passive, in which case it will appear, at least outwardly, to causeno harm. On the other hand, it can be actively hostile to the point ofcausing actual destruction. The antilanguage is the language of the antisociety. It isparallel to the antisociety, which of course generates it. Bothlanguage and its counterpart, antilanguage, share equal linguisticsignificance. According to Halliday, either pair, a society and itslanguage or an antisociety and its (anti) language, is, equally, aninstance of the prevailing sociolinguistic order (164). Halliday describes the antilanguage as a form of resocialization,as a mechanism that creates an alternative reality. In this sense, shedoes not see it as a negative construct, but rather of reconstruction(170). The significant aspect of the language/antilanguage dynamicexists in the distance between the two, and in the tension that iscaused by that distance. The individual may function in either worldand may go back and forth with relative comfort. In this sense, it mayseem that he is living a double existence. Still, it should not be forgotten that both aspects—language andantilanguage—originate from the same place. Because of this commonbackground, there is continuity between them which parallels thatbetween society and antisociety. Not only is there a continuity, thereis also tension. Hence, although the languages may be expressed bymembers of different social strata, they are both parts of the samesocial system. In other words, the antisociety is, in terms ofLà ©vi-Strausss distinction between metaphor and metonymy, metonymic tosociety—it is an extension of it, within the social system (Halliday175). Thus, basically, an antilanguage is just another language. However,the world it exists in is a counter-reality, which in itself hascertain implications: It implies preoccupation with the definition anddefence of identity through the ritual functioning of the socialhierarchy. It implies a special conception of information and ofknowledge (172). In addition, there will be a certain amount of secrecy in anantilanguage; this is inherent in its nature. The reality in which itfunctions is a secret reality. Generally, the members of this realitydo have secrets. Often these secrets may have something of an illegalassociation to them. It is just as likely, however, that the secretsare not illegal, but merely lacking in respectability and socialsanction. They may be the secrets of a segment of the population whichexists at least partly in its fringes, although its members may notwant this known in the mainstream. The antisociety is, then, a metaphorfor the society, and it joins society at the level of the social system. The perspective of the antilanguage is generally that of adistinctly different view of the world, one which is thereforepotentially threatening, if it does not coincide with ones own'(Halliday 179). The purpose of the antilanguage is primarily fordisplay as its speakers struggle to maintain their counter-realitywhile existing within the confines of the world. An antilanguage, according to Halliday, brings into sharp reliefthe role of language as a realization of the power structure ofsociety (181). The antilanguages of countercultures, such as prisonsand criminal networks, are often full are defined against the socialstructure. Essentially, they are defined by what they are not. This isnot unlike the jargon or nomenclature of certain highly-specialisedprofessions, which may in some sense be seen as having a similar—thoughacceptable by society—counter-reality. Members of mainstream society who are speakers solely of standarddialect may have negative reactions to antilanguage. However, they willusually express this indirectly. For example, they may state that theydont like the vowels as they are pronounced by the speakers of theantilanguage, when in essence what they are saying is that they dontlike the values held by the speakers of the antilanguage. 3. Labovs Finding: The Concept of Sounding Labov and his colleagues (Paul Cohen, Clarence Robins, and JohnLewis) studied the vernacular of young American black males in theinner city areas of New York. The youths ranged in age from eight to 19years old, and they spoke a relatively uniform grammar, the language ofstreet culture. Labov and his team used a variety of methods to gather their data,the most important of which was long-term participant-observation withpeer groups (via). They collected tape-recorded conversations that tookplace on school buses, field trips, and parties—essentially, any typeof gathering where the youths got together and socialized. They thencarefully analyzed the data they collected, noting the patterns theyfound in speech events. Two examples of these exchanges are below. A: Eat shit. B: Hop on the spoon. A. Move over. B. I cant, your mothers already there. The following exchange is between two adolescents, John and Willie, with an observer (Rel) looking on: John: Who father wear raggedy drawers? Willie: Yeh the ones with so many holes in them when-a-you walk they whistle? Rel: Oh . . . shi-it! When you walk they whistle! Oh shit! (326) Given the insults against the person, his family, his poverty, aperson who is not a member of a given culture might expect thesituation to escalate into physical conflict. However, Labov points out that these are actually ritual insults. Herefers to this as sounding, which he describes as a complex patternof verbal conflict. Sounding has also been called playing the dozensor signifying. It consists of a dialogue that is usually performedfor an audience of observers who are usually peers. The dialogue itselfconsists of ritual insults, most of which are directed towards theother speakers mother, self, or housing situation. The speakers tradethese sounds back and forth as though in competition, and theaudience looks on. Occasionally an audience member will comment, approve, ordisapprove of the statements of one or both speakers. Labov points outthat the audience is an essential ingredient to this process: It istrue that one person can sound against another without a third personbeing present, but the presupposition that this is public behavior caneasily be heard in the verbal style. The presence of an audience has a definite impact on the speechevent. The sounds are no longer spoken in a direct, face-to-faceconversational mode when others are present. The speakers voices tendto be raised and they become more projected, suggesting full awarenessthat the audience is there. In the second exchange above, Rel makes acomment on Willies insult, praising it. In a sounding session, Labovpoints out, everything is public—nothing significant happens withoutdrawing comment. The rules and patterning of this particular speechevent are therefore open for our inspection (327). In fact, theexistence of an audience is considered a defining factor, according toLabov. A primary difference between sounding and other speech events isthat most sounds are evaluated overtly and immediately by theaudience (325). By closely analyzing the discourse of this segment of thepopulation, Labov was able to isolate certain characteristics and todiscern patterns in the structure of this ritua l exchange of insults.After a while, the fundamental difference that divides ritual insultsand personal insults became clear. For example, there was a very clearopposition between an insult that is made during this ritualperformance and an actual, personal insult. The appropriate responsesare quite different: a personal insult is answered by a denial, excuse,or mitigation, whereas a sound or ritual insult is answered by longersequences (335). The ritual insults must be exaggerated to thepoint of being ridiculous and clearly untrue. This is clear to both thespeakers and to the audience that is following the exchange. If theinsults violate this rule—for example, one speaker makes a comment thatis both derogatory and which is known to be accurate—the ritual mayturn into conflict. The speech event we call sounding is not isolated from other formsof verbal interaction: it can merge with them or become transformedinto a series of personal insults, asserts Labov (330). He points outthat when ritual insult passes over into a different level ofdiscourse, that of interpersonal conflict, the difference between thetwo is unmistakably clear. Audience reaction is a key tool in assessing sounds. Laughter isthe primary mark of affirmation. A really successful sound will beevaluated by overt commentsAnother, even more forceful mode ofapproving sounds is t repeat the striking part of the sound oneself'(325). Negative reactions to sounds happen with a similar frequency andare equally overt. At the end of any sounding contest, all members,speakers and audience alike, are keenly aware of the who has come outahead. 4-a. Goffmans Notion: Face in Politeness Goffman writes that the ritual order seems to be organizedbasically on accommodative lines (109). These lines allow individualsto build and maintain illusions about themselves, and are not governedby laws or justice. Rather, Goffman asserts, the main principle of theritual order is not justice but face (110). Hence, the governingprinciple is what allows individuals to save face. Individuals whocross the line do not suffer retribution, but rather receive what isnecessary to bolster the illusion of self to which they are committed. The ways in which an individuals may insulate themselves aremyriad. Some of them include half-truths, illusions, andrationalizations. Therefore, not only are they able to convincethemselves of the beliefs necessary to his continued sense of self,they are further bolstered by the support of those close to them. Thusthey continue to believe in the illusion of self, and this illusion isfurther maintained and reinforced by the members of their immediate,intimate circle (109). 4-b. Does face exist in the discourse when verbal conflict occurs? An incidence of verbal conflict requires the individual uponwhom the offense has been committed to react in some way. The type ofreaction will depend on the level of offense. One mechanism for savingface is avoidance. That is, if a person is offended by anotherindividual, but can let the incident go without losing too much face,then it is likely that the offended person will let the situation go.He or she may rationalize this by telling themselves that they willdeal with the offender at some point in the future, perhaps when thecircumstances are optimal—although it is just as likely that when thispoint in time presents itself, no action will be taken. If the offense committed against the person is great, an actionmust be taken by the offended person. They may decide to withdraw fromthe situation and may avoid future encounters with individuals whobreak the ritual code. Alternately, they may arrange to have theoffending person removed, thus ensuring that there will be no furthercommunication necessary with this individual. Societies must mobilize their members as self-regulatingparticipants in social encounters Goffman asserts. Ritual is one wayof doing this. Members of society are taught the importance of face,and that they should value such qualities as pride, honor, dignity, andpoise (110). Maintaining face then is a one way in which individuals protectthemselves and maintain their illusions of who they are and where theystand in the social hierarchy. This does not mean that face is realor authentic: Universal human nature is not a very human thing,asserts Goffman. By acquiring it, the person becomes a kind ofconstruct, built up not from inner psychic propensities but from moralrules that are impressed upon him from without (110). This constructis necessary for the individuals sense of self and helps him tomaintain the ritual equilibrium that is essential for his survival. 5. Brown and Levinson and the politeness phenomena Penelope Brown and Stephen Levinson derive their definition offace from Goffman. They also include the English folk term, whichincludes the concept of being embarrassed or humiliated—or, simply put,losing face. They explain this further: Thus face is something thatis emotionally invested, and that can be lost, maintained, or enhanced,and must be constantly attended to in interaction (Brown and Levinson61). Brown and Levinson also point out that one individuals sense offace is dependent upon the continued maintenance of everyone elsessense of face. A threat to one individuals face, then, becomes athreat to all. Individuals in the community soon learn that it is intheir best interest to defend not only their own faces, but those ofthe other members of the community as well. Brown and Levinson discuss two kinds of linguistic politeness: positive politeness and negative politeness. Central to our model is a highly abstract notion of â€Å"face†which consists of two specific kinds of desires(â€Å"face-wants†) attributed by interactants to one another: thedesire to be unimpeded in ones actions (negative face), and the desire (in some respects) to be approved of (positive face)(13). Brown and Levinson offer fifteen strategies that speakers use to establish positive politeness: [H= addressee] 1. notice, attend to Hs interests, wants, needs, goods 2. exaggerate interest, approval, sympathy with H 3. intensify interest to H 4. use in-group identity markers -address forms -use of in-group language or dialect -use of jargon or slang -contraction and ellipsis 5. seek agreement 6. avoid disagreement 7. presuppose/raise/assert common ground–gossip, small talk 8. joke 9. assert or presuppose Ss knowledge of and concern for Hs wants 10. offer, promise 11. be optimistic 12. include both S H in the activity, using we 13. give (or ask for reasons) 14. assume or assert reciprocity 15. give gifts–goods, sympathy, understanding, cooperation If positive politeness is defined as redress directed to theaddressees positive face, then negative politeness is redressiveaction addressed to the addressees negative face: his want to have hisfreedom of action unhindered and his attention unimpeded (129).Strategies used by speakers in the process of establishing negativeface include: 1. be conventionally indirect–opposing tensions, indirect speech acts 2. question, hedge 3. be pessimistic 4. minimize the imposition 5. give deference 6. apologize 7. impersonalize S H 8. state the FTA [face-threatening act] as a general rules 9. nominalize 10. go on record as incurring a debt, or as not indebting H Brown and Levinson have a third category for speech actions. Thisone is off record. A communicative act is done off record if it isdoe in such a way that it is not possible to attribute only one clearcommunicative intention to the act (211). 1. give hints 2. give assocation clues 3. presuppose 4. understate 5. overstate 6. use tautologies 7. use contradictions 8. be ironic 9. use metaphors 10. use rhetorical questions 11. be ambiguous 12. be vague 13. over-generalize 14. displace H 15. be incomplete, use ellipsis Off record politeness is a sort of hybrid strategy that falls in between the two and is difficult, if not impossible to definitively categorize (Brown and Levinson, 230). 6a. Grimshaws concept of conflict talk In the introduction to his 1990 volume Conflict talk:Sociolinguistic investigations of arguments in conversations, AllenGrimshaw writes: Conflict talk is at the same time so complex a phenomenon andone so deeply implicated in every dimension of human sociallife that it would be possible to identify dozens of reasonswhy it should be a focus of systematic inquiry; by thesame token one would be left wondering why its study hasbeen so neglected (3). Grimshaw points out that conflicts may have as their focus a numberof subjects, including beliefs, objects (things), persons, groups, orinstitutions (294). Interestingly, he asserts that as long as conflicttalk is sustained and the participants do not withdraw, conflicts need not increase in hostility. The increase in hostilityseems to occur only with an increased sense of intensity on both sides 6b. Goodwin and Goodwin: interstitial argument In their essay Interstitial argument, Charles Goodwin andMarjorie Harness Goodwin present the findings of their researchregarding verbal conflict. During the course of their research theywere able to closely study the relationship between participants andtheir local environment. One thing they found is that despite thedisruptive behavior that accompanies an argument, the participants payextremely close attention to the details surrounding them. During theargument, what goes on is actually a process of very intricatecoordination between the parties who are opposing each other (85). For a year and a half M.H. Goodwin audiotaped a group of urbanblack children as they played together in the street. This was onesegment of a larger project in which a range of speech activities werebeing studies. These activities included gossip, arguments, stories,and directives, and similar activities. Specifically, four childrenwere audiotaped during oppositional exchanges, and these exchanges werethen transcribed and analyzed. One of the issues at hand was aslingshot battle. All exchanges, from the planning stages to theselection of teams to the preparation of weapons, were studied inmeticulous detail. From these data Goodwin examined content shift andcontext within argument, multi-party argument, and piggybacking, oraffiliation in argument. Analysing their findings, the Goodwins discovered that by followingthe sequence of utterances, it was clear that the four individualsinvolved in the exchange did not have equal positions (107). It seemedclear that each side had a primary spokesman, followed by a secondindividual who followed the behavior of the primary spokesman. This ledGoodwin and Goodwin to conclude that the structures utilised in theprocess of negotiating opposition also provide resources for theparticipants, enabling them to duplicate types of social organization.Thus, the process of arguing essentially gives the participants resources for reproducing a life that is greater than that of the argument itself (113). Finally, Goodwin and Goodwin write that it has been argued that thetalk people produce during their dealings with each other is oftenconsidered to be too disorderly to be properly organized and studied.In response to this, they write that in analysing the data from thisstudy they found anything but disorder. The participants themselves,within the space of a very few turns, produce a range of systematicpermutations on a basic structure with a precision that would tax theingenuity of even the most inventive experimental design to replicate'(114). 6c. Schiffrin: argument: the role of opinions and stories Deborah Schiffrin asserts that everyday forms of talk are guidedby norms of co-operation and competition. Even argument, a form of talkwhich might seem to be the paradigm example of conflict talk, can be aco-operative way of speaking as well as (or instead of) a competitiveway of speaking (241). Schriffin uses Goffmans concepts of footing and frame asadditional links. Footing and frames are very similar to eachother. Schriffin explains the frame as the definition of thesituation, and the footing as the sort of alignments taken up byparticipation (242). She then goes on to explore opinions and stories. With regard toopinions, she admits that it is not always possible to find linguisticfeatures which mark a declarative statement as the presentation of an opinion, and that because of this,one needs to look elsewhere, and she presents her criteria fordiscerning what an opinion actually consists of, concluding thatopinions are unverifiable, internal, subjective depictions of anexternal worldthe facts presented by the author cannot remainundisputed, but the principals stance toward that proposition cannotbe/ disputed 248-9). This, she explains, also gives opinions aparadoxical status in argument, such that they can either initiate orend an argument (249). She then discusses the role of stories, breaking them down into: †¢ selective interpretation †¢ deictic (time) shifts †¢ evaluation †¢ contextualization First of all, she asserts, one must consider that theinterpretation of stories is highly selective. Individuals will choosecertain stories and interpret them in a way that justifies certainbehaviors and actions. Second, there are deictic, or time shifts, to beconsidered. For example, frequently a speaker must re-orient him orherself back to the actual time of the story, to a time when they mighthave had less knowledge or information about the story. The thirdaspect of stories that Schiffrin finds significant are the evaluativedevices used by the storyteller. These devices can be phonological,grammatical, or textual in nature. Finally, she asserts, stories arepresented as frames within certain events are explained,contextualizing them. Text Analysis on Verbal Conflict, using examples from the screenplay of Trainspotting 1. Overview. Trainspotting is a coming-of-age story in story of a group ofheroin-addicted young people from Edinburgh. It is a very vividdepiction of junkie life as well as a cross-section of life in the 90s.The title of the book, Trainspotting, is also a term used in theBritish Isles for people who, as a hobby, keep track of local trainschedules with excessive vigilance. Essentially, the term is synonymouswith wasting time, making this activity a sort of metaphor for heroinaddiction. Both activities are essentially pointless and futile. Drugs are a central focus of the story, and in particular (but notexclusively) heroin. This is very clear from the language that is used.This can be noted from the frequency of the occurrence of terms whichrelate to heroin. There are numerous references to the sale,acquisition, preparation, injection, and withdrawal of heroin. Thedrug-related words which appear with highest frequency include hit,junk, shot, and inject, each of which appear more than ten times.Other commonly used drug words include of course the drugitself—heroin—along with its many variations, such as smack and skag. However, despite the omnipresence of drug and drug-relatedactivities, the story does not set out to glorify heroin use; neitherdoes it condemn or moralize use of the drug. It does, however, give aclear depiction of the bleak environment this group of young peoplemust survive in. The area is working-class. References are made to DSSchecks and Giro, which are terms associated with the life of povertyand struggle. This dismal backdrop, and the fact that they have littlehope of physical escape, makes their wreckless behaviour a bit moreunderstandable. Their addictions seem to be the most reliable, if notthe only, escape. Trainspotting is very definitely a movie about youth culture. Itshows an intricate understanding of the issues and influences uponyouth at that period in time, and it realistically reflects thecultural experiences had by young people. Trainspotting appeals to acult-prone youth because it contains the elements that comprisefoundations of subculture in British culture. Alt hough other worksappealed to the youth culture of that period, Trainspotting enjoyed apopularity that exceeded most of them. This may have been due to itsauthenticity in replicating the youth culture experience. When it first premiered (and even now), the graphic detail ofits language and content was found to be rather shocking by some.However, it resonated very strongly with anyone familiar with drugculture. It reflects, sometimes quite graphically, the underbelly ofEdinburgh in the 1980s, and focuses, as mentioned earlier, mainly onone group of heroin addicts, as well as their friends and families.Their experiences as they struggle with very real issues that many canidentify with: life, work, family, death, the struggle to survive.Other issues—ones that may not have been part of mainstream culture—arepresented as well: AIDS, heroin overdose, heroin withdrawal, and raves,among others. The use of dialect is very powerful in Trainspotting. Inaddition, the social, political, and economic views expressed by thecharacters would have mirrored the views of societys fringemembers—specifically members of the youth and/or drug cultures. Renton and his mates do not rebel against society, but they doattempt to transcend in their destructive ways. Renton often parodiesfamous Thatcher quotes through his â€Å"Choose life† rants and frequentcomments regarding the emptiness of society, as demonstrated in thefollowing examples from the screenplay: †¢ Choose life. Choose a job. Choose a career. Choose a family.Choose a fucking big television, choose washing machines, cars, compactdisc players, and electrical tin openers. †¢ Choose good health, low cholesterol, and dental insurance. Choosefixed-interest mortgage repayments. Choose a starter home. Choose yourfriends. †¢ Choose leisurewear and matching luggage. Choose a three-piece suiton hire purchase in a range of fucking fabrics. Choose DIY andwondering who the fuck you are on a Sunday morning. Choose sitting onthat couch watching mind-numbing, spirit-crushing game shows, stuffingfucking junk food into your mouth. Choose rotting away at the endof it all, pishing your last in a miserable home, nothing more than anembarrassment to the selfish, fucked-up brats you have spawned toreplace yourself. Choose your future. Choose life. †¢ I chose not to choose life. I chose something else. And thereasons? There are no reasons. Who needs reasons when youve gotheroin? The lifestyle portrayed in Trainspotting has been described asrepresenting a detached subculture of British youth. However, thereis no evidence in the screenplay to support this assertion. The youngcharacters in this story simply attempt to survive in the largerenvironment by adapting in whatever ways they can, primarily throughmusic and through drugs. They do not attempt to change the status quo,nor are they champions of social reform. They simply react to the bleaksocial conditions that they were born into. Unable to physically escape their environment, they find release in music, drugs, alcohol, and sex. Renton is a prime example of this. He is not proactive, he issimply a survivor. He assesses situations with the manipulative eye ofan addict, and he reacts accordingly, taking advantage when he sees theopportunity. He and his contemporaries are merely representative ofyouth who are struggling for a sense of identity. Their mindset isambiguous; they react to outside societal pressures by employing theirchosen means. But they cannot be considered as a youth subculture basedon their language that has been described in the previous section. Language T Analysis of Linguistic Theory in Transpotting (1996) Analysis of Linguistic Theory in Transpotting (1996) Introduction The main argument of this dissertation is that the language of John Hodges screenplay Trainspotting, even though it appears to contain sub-cultural social contexts, cannot be categorised within the framework of linguistic theory as representing a youth subculture. The verbal conflict formation in the text should be read as reflective of the larger worldview that verbal conflict behaviour is inevitable in all societies, as are the existence of social dialectsand the usage of common slang. 1. Gumperz Term: Speech Community In his 1982 volume Discourse strategies, John Gumperz discusses the concept of a speech community. He defines speech community as a system of organized diversity held together by common norms and aspirations. He also states that the speech community must form the starting point of linguistic analysis. He further states that although members of the same speech community may differ in terms of their beliefs and their behaviours, that this is a normal variation and has been shown to be a systematic regularity of communities. For, the most part, however, members of speech communities generally share norms of evaluation. Gumperz stresses the point that it is not the individual speakers of a language that make up a speech community. He cites the theories of Saussure and others of that time period to support this statement: It was believed that these reflect either momentary preferences, personal idiosyncrasies, or expressive or emotive tendencies, which rely on universal signalling mechani sms and are thus not part of the system of meaningful sounds by which substantive information is conveyed (11-12). According to Gumperz, although the ability to form grammatical statements is common to all speakers of a certain language, the more complex knowledge of contextualization convention varies widely. He also points out that contextualization is not something that can be attained through formal education or reading, but must be learned through face-to-face interactions. Discourse at this level is marked by conventions that reflect prolonged interactive experience by individuals cooperating in institutionalized settings in the pursuit of shared goals in friendship, occupational and similar networks of relationships (209). Language and social identity, a volume published in the same year, was co-authored by Jenny Cook-Gumperz. In this work, he discusses the role of communicative skills in our society, asserting that they have been radically altered. It is absolutely essential for individuals in todays society to be capable of managing or adapting to a variety of diverse communicative situations. In addition, they must be able to interact freely with people who are virtual strangers to them. These abilities are an absolute necessity if one is to acquire a sense of personal control and to establish a sense of order in ones life. The cause for this change, he asserts, is the bureaucratization of public institutions, which have become increasingly pervasive in our day-to-day lives. He sees this as a result of our post-industrial society and states that it exists in both Western and non-Western countries. The skills required to function at this level are far more complex, but must be mastered if one is to function autonomously as a member of a speech community. 2. Hallidays Notion: Antilanguages In Language as social semiotic: The social interpretation oflanguage and meaning, M.A.K. Halliday explains the initial acquisitionof language as part of the development of the child as a socialcreature: Language is the main channel through which the patterns ofliving are transmitted to him, through which he learns to act as amember of a â€Å"society† (9). The child does this, she goes on toexplain, through associations with family, neighbourhood, and varioussocial groups; these comprise the foundation on which the child baseshis or her belief systems and values. The child does not learn these things directly, but ratherindirectly, Halliday explains. It is through the accumulatedexperience of numerous small events, insignificant in themselves, inwhich his behaviour is guided and controlled, and in the course ofwhich he contracts and develops personal relationships of all kinds'(9). The unifying factor here is language; language is the mediumthrough which all of this takes place. She develops her discussion further by introducing the notion of anantisociety which is in direct contrast to society, describing theantisociety as a conscious alternative that can also be viewed as aform of resistance. This resistance can take a number of forms. It canbe passive, in which case it will appear, at least outwardly, to causeno harm. On the other hand, it can be actively hostile to the point ofcausing actual destruction. The antilanguage is the language of the antisociety. It isparallel to the antisociety, which of course generates it. Bothlanguage and its counterpart, antilanguage, share equal linguisticsignificance. According to Halliday, either pair, a society and itslanguage or an antisociety and its (anti) language, is, equally, aninstance of the prevailing sociolinguistic order (164). Halliday describes the antilanguage as a form of resocialization,as a mechanism that creates an alternative reality. In this sense, shedoes not see it as a negative construct, but rather of reconstruction(170). The significant aspect of the language/antilanguage dynamicexists in the distance between the two, and in the tension that iscaused by that distance. The individual may function in either worldand may go back and forth with relative comfort. In this sense, it mayseem that he is living a double existence. Still, it should not be forgotten that both aspects—language andantilanguage—originate from the same place. Because of this commonbackground, there is continuity between them which parallels thatbetween society and antisociety. Not only is there a continuity, thereis also tension. Hence, although the languages may be expressed bymembers of different social strata, they are both parts of the samesocial system. In other words, the antisociety is, in terms ofLà ©vi-Strausss distinction between metaphor and metonymy, metonymic tosociety—it is an extension of it, within the social system (Halliday175). Thus, basically, an antilanguage is just another language. However,the world it exists in is a counter-reality, which in itself hascertain implications: It implies preoccupation with the definition anddefence of identity through the ritual functioning of the socialhierarchy. It implies a special conception of information and ofknowledge (172). In addition, there will be a certain amount of secrecy in anantilanguage; this is inherent in its nature. The reality in which itfunctions is a secret reality. Generally, the members of this realitydo have secrets. Often these secrets may have something of an illegalassociation to them. It is just as likely, however, that the secretsare not illegal, but merely lacking in respectability and socialsanction. They may be the secrets of a segment of the population whichexists at least partly in its fringes, although its members may notwant this known in the mainstream. The antisociety is, then, a metaphorfor the society, and it joins society at the level of the social system. The perspective of the antilanguage is generally that of adistinctly different view of the world, one which is thereforepotentially threatening, if it does not coincide with ones own'(Halliday 179). The purpose of the antilanguage is primarily fordisplay as its speakers struggle to maintain their counter-realitywhile existing within the confines of the world. An antilanguage, according to Halliday, brings into sharp reliefthe role of language as a realization of the power structure ofsociety (181). The antilanguages of countercultures, such as prisonsand criminal networks, are often full are defined against the socialstructure. Essentially, they are defined by what they are not. This isnot unlike the jargon or nomenclature of certain highly-specialisedprofessions, which may in some sense be seen as having a similar—thoughacceptable by society—counter-reality. Members of mainstream society who are speakers solely of standarddialect may have negative reactions to antilanguage. However, they willusually express this indirectly. For example, they may state that theydont like the vowels as they are pronounced by the speakers of theantilanguage, when in essence what they are saying is that they dontlike the values held by the speakers of the antilanguage. 3. Labovs Finding: The Concept of Sounding Labov and his colleagues (Paul Cohen, Clarence Robins, and JohnLewis) studied the vernacular of young American black males in theinner city areas of New York. The youths ranged in age from eight to 19years old, and they spoke a relatively uniform grammar, the language ofstreet culture. Labov and his team used a variety of methods to gather their data,the most important of which was long-term participant-observation withpeer groups (via). They collected tape-recorded conversations that tookplace on school buses, field trips, and parties—essentially, any typeof gathering where the youths got together and socialized. They thencarefully analyzed the data they collected, noting the patterns theyfound in speech events. Two examples of these exchanges are below. A: Eat shit. B: Hop on the spoon. A. Move over. B. I cant, your mothers already there. The following exchange is between two adolescents, John and Willie, with an observer (Rel) looking on: John: Who father wear raggedy drawers? Willie: Yeh the ones with so many holes in them when-a-you walk they whistle? Rel: Oh . . . shi-it! When you walk they whistle! Oh shit! (326) Given the insults against the person, his family, his poverty, aperson who is not a member of a given culture might expect thesituation to escalate into physical conflict. However, Labov points out that these are actually ritual insults. Herefers to this as sounding, which he describes as a complex patternof verbal conflict. Sounding has also been called playing the dozensor signifying. It consists of a dialogue that is usually performedfor an audience of observers who are usually peers. The dialogue itselfconsists of ritual insults, most of which are directed towards theother speakers mother, self, or housing situation. The speakers tradethese sounds back and forth as though in competition, and theaudience looks on. Occasionally an audience member will comment, approve, ordisapprove of the statements of one or both speakers. Labov points outthat the audience is an essential ingredient to this process: It istrue that one person can sound against another without a third personbeing present, but the presupposition that this is public behavior caneasily be heard in the verbal style. The presence of an audience has a definite impact on the speechevent. The sounds are no longer spoken in a direct, face-to-faceconversational mode when others are present. The speakers voices tendto be raised and they become more projected, suggesting full awarenessthat the audience is there. In the second exchange above, Rel makes acomment on Willies insult, praising it. In a sounding session, Labovpoints out, everything is public—nothing significant happens withoutdrawing comment. The rules and patterning of this particular speechevent are therefore open for our inspection (327). In fact, theexistence of an audience is considered a defining factor, according toLabov. A primary difference between sounding and other speech events isthat most sounds are evaluated overtly and immediately by theaudience (325). By closely analyzing the discourse of this segment of thepopulation, Labov was able to isolate certain characteristics and todiscern patterns in the structure of this ritua l exchange of insults.After a while, the fundamental difference that divides ritual insultsand personal insults became clear. For example, there was a very clearopposition between an insult that is made during this ritualperformance and an actual, personal insult. The appropriate responsesare quite different: a personal insult is answered by a denial, excuse,or mitigation, whereas a sound or ritual insult is answered by longersequences (335). The ritual insults must be exaggerated to thepoint of being ridiculous and clearly untrue. This is clear to both thespeakers and to the audience that is following the exchange. If theinsults violate this rule—for example, one speaker makes a comment thatis both derogatory and which is known to be accurate—the ritual mayturn into conflict. The speech event we call sounding is not isolated from other formsof verbal interaction: it can merge with them or become transformedinto a series of personal insults, asserts Labov (330). He points outthat when ritual insult passes over into a different level ofdiscourse, that of interpersonal conflict, the difference between thetwo is unmistakably clear. Audience reaction is a key tool in assessing sounds. Laughter isthe primary mark of affirmation. A really successful sound will beevaluated by overt commentsAnother, even more forceful mode ofapproving sounds is t repeat the striking part of the sound oneself'(325). Negative reactions to sounds happen with a similar frequency andare equally overt. At the end of any sounding contest, all members,speakers and audience alike, are keenly aware of the who has come outahead. 4-a. Goffmans Notion: Face in Politeness Goffman writes that the ritual order seems to be organizedbasically on accommodative lines (109). These lines allow individualsto build and maintain illusions about themselves, and are not governedby laws or justice. Rather, Goffman asserts, the main principle of theritual order is not justice but face (110). Hence, the governingprinciple is what allows individuals to save face. Individuals whocross the line do not suffer retribution, but rather receive what isnecessary to bolster the illusion of self to which they are committed. The ways in which an individuals may insulate themselves aremyriad. Some of them include half-truths, illusions, andrationalizations. Therefore, not only are they able to convincethemselves of the beliefs necessary to his continued sense of self,they are further bolstered by the support of those close to them. Thusthey continue to believe in the illusion of self, and this illusion isfurther maintained and reinforced by the members of their immediate,intimate circle (109). 4-b. Does face exist in the discourse when verbal conflict occurs? An incidence of verbal conflict requires the individual uponwhom the offense has been committed to react in some way. The type ofreaction will depend on the level of offense. One mechanism for savingface is avoidance. That is, if a person is offended by anotherindividual, but can let the incident go without losing too much face,then it is likely that the offended person will let the situation go.He or she may rationalize this by telling themselves that they willdeal with the offender at some point in the future, perhaps when thecircumstances are optimal—although it is just as likely that when thispoint in time presents itself, no action will be taken. If the offense committed against the person is great, an actionmust be taken by the offended person. They may decide to withdraw fromthe situation and may avoid future encounters with individuals whobreak the ritual code. Alternately, they may arrange to have theoffending person removed, thus ensuring that there will be no furthercommunication necessary with this individual. Societies must mobilize their members as self-regulatingparticipants in social encounters Goffman asserts. Ritual is one wayof doing this. Members of society are taught the importance of face,and that they should value such qualities as pride, honor, dignity, andpoise (110). Maintaining face then is a one way in which individuals protectthemselves and maintain their illusions of who they are and where theystand in the social hierarchy. This does not mean that face is realor authentic: Universal human nature is not a very human thing,asserts Goffman. By acquiring it, the person becomes a kind ofconstruct, built up not from inner psychic propensities but from moralrules that are impressed upon him from without (110). This constructis necessary for the individuals sense of self and helps him tomaintain the ritual equilibrium that is essential for his survival. 5. Brown and Levinson and the politeness phenomena Penelope Brown and Stephen Levinson derive their definition offace from Goffman. They also include the English folk term, whichincludes the concept of being embarrassed or humiliated—or, simply put,losing face. They explain this further: Thus face is something thatis emotionally invested, and that can be lost, maintained, or enhanced,and must be constantly attended to in interaction (Brown and Levinson61). Brown and Levinson also point out that one individuals sense offace is dependent upon the continued maintenance of everyone elsessense of face. A threat to one individuals face, then, becomes athreat to all. Individuals in the community soon learn that it is intheir best interest to defend not only their own faces, but those ofthe other members of the community as well. Brown and Levinson discuss two kinds of linguistic politeness: positive politeness and negative politeness. Central to our model is a highly abstract notion of â€Å"face†which consists of two specific kinds of desires(â€Å"face-wants†) attributed by interactants to one another: thedesire to be unimpeded in ones actions (negative face), and the desire (in some respects) to be approved of (positive face)(13). Brown and Levinson offer fifteen strategies that speakers use to establish positive politeness: [H= addressee] 1. notice, attend to Hs interests, wants, needs, goods 2. exaggerate interest, approval, sympathy with H 3. intensify interest to H 4. use in-group identity markers -address forms -use of in-group language or dialect -use of jargon or slang -contraction and ellipsis 5. seek agreement 6. avoid disagreement 7. presuppose/raise/assert common ground–gossip, small talk 8. joke 9. assert or presuppose Ss knowledge of and concern for Hs wants 10. offer, promise 11. be optimistic 12. include both S H in the activity, using we 13. give (or ask for reasons) 14. assume or assert reciprocity 15. give gifts–goods, sympathy, understanding, cooperation If positive politeness is defined as redress directed to theaddressees positive face, then negative politeness is redressiveaction addressed to the addressees negative face: his want to have hisfreedom of action unhindered and his attention unimpeded (129).Strategies used by speakers in the process of establishing negativeface include: 1. be conventionally indirect–opposing tensions, indirect speech acts 2. question, hedge 3. be pessimistic 4. minimize the imposition 5. give deference 6. apologize 7. impersonalize S H 8. state the FTA [face-threatening act] as a general rules 9. nominalize 10. go on record as incurring a debt, or as not indebting H Brown and Levinson have a third category for speech actions. Thisone is off record. A communicative act is done off record if it isdoe in such a way that it is not possible to attribute only one clearcommunicative intention to the act (211). 1. give hints 2. give assocation clues 3. presuppose 4. understate 5. overstate 6. use tautologies 7. use contradictions 8. be ironic 9. use metaphors 10. use rhetorical questions 11. be ambiguous 12. be vague 13. over-generalize 14. displace H 15. be incomplete, use ellipsis Off record politeness is a sort of hybrid strategy that falls in between the two and is difficult, if not impossible to definitively categorize (Brown and Levinson, 230). 6a. Grimshaws concept of conflict talk In the introduction to his 1990 volume Conflict talk:Sociolinguistic investigations of arguments in conversations, AllenGrimshaw writes: Conflict talk is at the same time so complex a phenomenon andone so deeply implicated in every dimension of human sociallife that it would be possible to identify dozens of reasonswhy it should be a focus of systematic inquiry; by thesame token one would be left wondering why its study hasbeen so neglected (3). Grimshaw points out that conflicts may have as their focus a numberof subjects, including beliefs, objects (things), persons, groups, orinstitutions (294). Interestingly, he asserts that as long as conflicttalk is sustained and the participants do not withdraw, conflicts need not increase in hostility. The increase in hostilityseems to occur only with an increased sense of intensity on both sides 6b. Goodwin and Goodwin: interstitial argument In their essay Interstitial argument, Charles Goodwin andMarjorie Harness Goodwin present the findings of their researchregarding verbal conflict. During the course of their research theywere able to closely study the relationship between participants andtheir local environment. One thing they found is that despite thedisruptive behavior that accompanies an argument, the participants payextremely close attention to the details surrounding them. During theargument, what goes on is actually a process of very intricatecoordination between the parties who are opposing each other (85). For a year and a half M.H. Goodwin audiotaped a group of urbanblack children as they played together in the street. This was onesegment of a larger project in which a range of speech activities werebeing studies. These activities included gossip, arguments, stories,and directives, and similar activities. Specifically, four childrenwere audiotaped during oppositional exchanges, and these exchanges werethen transcribed and analyzed. One of the issues at hand was aslingshot battle. All exchanges, from the planning stages to theselection of teams to the preparation of weapons, were studied inmeticulous detail. From these data Goodwin examined content shift andcontext within argument, multi-party argument, and piggybacking, oraffiliation in argument. Analysing their findings, the Goodwins discovered that by followingthe sequence of utterances, it was clear that the four individualsinvolved in the exchange did not have equal positions (107). It seemedclear that each side had a primary spokesman, followed by a secondindividual who followed the behavior of the primary spokesman. This ledGoodwin and Goodwin to conclude that the structures utilised in theprocess of negotiating opposition also provide resources for theparticipants, enabling them to duplicate types of social organization.Thus, the process of arguing essentially gives the participants resources for reproducing a life that is greater than that of the argument itself (113). Finally, Goodwin and Goodwin write that it has been argued that thetalk people produce during their dealings with each other is oftenconsidered to be too disorderly to be properly organized and studied.In response to this, they write that in analysing the data from thisstudy they found anything but disorder. The participants themselves,within the space of a very few turns, produce a range of systematicpermutations on a basic structure with a precision that would tax theingenuity of even the most inventive experimental design to replicate'(114). 6c. Schiffrin: argument: the role of opinions and stories Deborah Schiffrin asserts that everyday forms of talk are guidedby norms of co-operation and competition. Even argument, a form of talkwhich might seem to be the paradigm example of conflict talk, can be aco-operative way of speaking as well as (or instead of) a competitiveway of speaking (241). Schriffin uses Goffmans concepts of footing and frame asadditional links. Footing and frames are very similar to eachother. Schriffin explains the frame as the definition of thesituation, and the footing as the sort of alignments taken up byparticipation (242). She then goes on to explore opinions and stories. With regard toopinions, she admits that it is not always possible to find linguisticfeatures which mark a declarative statement as the presentation of an opinion, and that because of this,one needs to look elsewhere, and she presents her criteria fordiscerning what an opinion actually consists of, concluding thatopinions are unverifiable, internal, subjective depictions of anexternal worldthe facts presented by the author cannot remainundisputed, but the principals stance toward that proposition cannotbe/ disputed 248-9). This, she explains, also gives opinions aparadoxical status in argument, such that they can either initiate orend an argument (249). She then discusses the role of stories, breaking them down into: †¢ selective interpretation †¢ deictic (time) shifts †¢ evaluation †¢ contextualization First of all, she asserts, one must consider that theinterpretation of stories is highly selective. Individuals will choosecertain stories and interpret them in a way that justifies certainbehaviors and actions. Second, there are deictic, or time shifts, to beconsidered. For example, frequently a speaker must re-orient him orherself back to the actual time of the story, to a time when they mighthave had less knowledge or information about the story. The thirdaspect of stories that Schiffrin finds significant are the evaluativedevices used by the storyteller. These devices can be phonological,grammatical, or textual in nature. Finally, she asserts, stories arepresented as frames within certain events are explained,contextualizing them. Text Analysis on Verbal Conflict, using examples from the screenplay of Trainspotting 1. Overview. Trainspotting is a coming-of-age story in story of a group ofheroin-addicted young people from Edinburgh. It is a very vividdepiction of junkie life as well as a cross-section of life in the 90s.The title of the book, Trainspotting, is also a term used in theBritish Isles for people who, as a hobby, keep track of local trainschedules with excessive vigilance. Essentially, the term is synonymouswith wasting time, making this activity a sort of metaphor for heroinaddiction. Both activities are essentially pointless and futile. Drugs are a central focus of the story, and in particular (but notexclusively) heroin. This is very clear from the language that is used.This can be noted from the frequency of the occurrence of terms whichrelate to heroin. There are numerous references to the sale,acquisition, preparation, injection, and withdrawal of heroin. Thedrug-related words which appear with highest frequency include hit,junk, shot, and inject, each of which appear more than ten times.Other commonly used drug words include of course the drugitself—heroin—along with its many variations, such as smack and skag. However, despite the omnipresence of drug and drug-relatedactivities, the story does not set out to glorify heroin use; neitherdoes it condemn or moralize use of the drug. It does, however, give aclear depiction of the bleak environment this group of young peoplemust survive in. The area is working-class. References are made to DSSchecks and Giro, which are terms associated with the life of povertyand struggle. This dismal backdrop, and the fact that they have littlehope of physical escape, makes their wreckless behaviour a bit moreunderstandable. Their addictions seem to be the most reliable, if notthe only, escape. Trainspotting is very definitely a movie about youth culture. Itshows an intricate understanding of the issues and influences uponyouth at that period in time, and it realistically reflects thecultural experiences had by young people. Trainspotting appeals to acult-prone youth because it contains the elements that comprisefoundations of subculture in British culture. Alt hough other worksappealed to the youth culture of that period, Trainspotting enjoyed apopularity that exceeded most of them. This may have been due to itsauthenticity in replicating the youth culture experience. When it first premiered (and even now), the graphic detail ofits language and content was found to be rather shocking by some.However, it resonated very strongly with anyone familiar with drugculture. It reflects, sometimes quite graphically, the underbelly ofEdinburgh in the 1980s, and focuses, as mentioned earlier, mainly onone group of heroin addicts, as well as their friends and families.Their experiences as they struggle with very real issues that many canidentify with: life, work, family, death, the struggle to survive.Other issues—ones that may not have been part of mainstream culture—arepresented as well: AIDS, heroin overdose, heroin withdrawal, and raves,among others. The use of dialect is very powerful in Trainspotting. Inaddition, the social, political, and economic views expressed by thecharacters would have mirrored the views of societys fringemembers—specifically members of the youth and/or drug cultures. Renton and his mates do not rebel against society, but they doattempt to transcend in their destructive ways. Renton often parodiesfamous Thatcher quotes through his â€Å"Choose life† rants and frequentcomments regarding the emptiness of society, as demonstrated in thefollowing examples from the screenplay: †¢ Choose life. Choose a job. Choose a career. Choose a family.Choose a fucking big television, choose washing machines, cars, compactdisc players, and electrical tin openers. †¢ Choose good health, low cholesterol, and dental insurance. Choosefixed-interest mortgage repayments. Choose a starter home. Choose yourfriends. †¢ Choose leisurewear and matching luggage. Choose a three-piece suiton hire purchase in a range of fucking fabrics. Choose DIY andwondering who the fuck you are on a Sunday morning. Choose sitting onthat couch watching mind-numbing, spirit-crushing game shows, stuffingfucking junk food into your mouth. Choose rotting away at the endof it all, pishing your last in a miserable home, nothing more than anembarrassment to the selfish, fucked-up brats you have spawned toreplace yourself. Choose your future. Choose life. †¢ I chose not to choose life. I chose something else. And thereasons? There are no reasons. Who needs reasons when youve gotheroin? The lifestyle portrayed in Trainspotting has been described asrepresenting a detached subculture of British youth. However, thereis no evidence in the screenplay to support this assertion. The youngcharacters in this story simply attempt to survive in the largerenvironment by adapting in whatever ways they can, primarily throughmusic and through drugs. They do not attempt to change the status quo,nor are they champions of social reform. They simply react to the bleaksocial conditions that they were born into. Unable to physically escape their environment, they find release in music, drugs, alcohol, and sex. Renton is a prime example of this. He is not proactive, he issimply a survivor. He assesses situations with the manipulative eye ofan addict, and he reacts accordingly, taking advantage when he sees theopportunity. He and his contemporaries are merely representative ofyouth who are struggling for a sense of identity. Their mindset isambiguous; they react to outside societal pressures by employing theirchosen means. But they cannot be considered as a youth subculture basedon their language that has been described in the previous section. Language T

Dill Pickle Essay -- essays research papers

  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã¢â‚¬Å"A Dill Pickle† is a story of a run in between two old lovers. The story begins with a nameless man eating a snack at a Chinese Pagoda. While waiting he sees a woman in the distance, as she walks forwards he sees Vera, a woman he dated six years prior. He invites her to sit down and have something to eat with him. She takes him up on the offer and sits down. They begin talking about the usual and then about the times that they spent together. He reminds her of the day they spent at Kew Gardens. What the man remembers of the day was how he was ignorant to all that she spoke to him. What Vera remembered was him confessing his love to her and telling her that no matter how much he lover her, she would never love him back.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Vera sees that he has changed a lot since their breakup. The man is considerably better looking from when she dated him. By the way he is dressed, it appears that he had done well for himself and has matured quite a bit. He offers her a cigarette from a Russian cigarette case, which leads him into his next conversation topic.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  He tells her that since their breakup he has done what they had dreamt of doing while they dated, travel to Russia. In fact, he had become a world traveler who spent over a year in Russia. He tells her of the straightforward manner in which Russians acted and how much she would have enjoyed it.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  He tells her how great o...

Road Carnage in Africa

Hot Topic Road accidents (Carnage) in Kenya. How organizations can contribute to address this imminent Human and Economic crisis. Table of Contents 1. Introduction to road accidents in Kenya2 2. The main issues with road accidents5 3. Other subsidiary issues7 4. The effect of road accidents to businesses and the economy 8 5. Prepare to manage road safety challenges in an organisation 10 6. Dealing with ethical and legal issues 13 7. Future implications if issue is not addressed 15 8. Bibliography17 1. Introduction Last year, 1 day before Christmas day, the Kenya Traffic police led by the Police Commissioner, Mr Mathew Iteere launched yet another National Road Safety Campaign aimed at curbing road accidents during the holidays and cutting the holiday period road accidents rate by 50% from the tradition high of 200-300 accidents that happen during that period from 24 December to 5 January (Daily Nation, 24th December 2009). In his Christmas message, The Police Commissioner regretted that most road accidents in Kenya can be avoided (even eliminated). He noted that road accidents are mainly caused by carelessness (human error and poor judgement) y road users. He singled out over-speeding, over-loading, none use of the safety belts and disregard of the Highway Code as the most abused traffic rules today. In his widely televised message, he issued a warning to careless drivers and directs the traffic police (blue boys) to act on those that abuse the traffic rules. Such a road safety crackdown is not new in the 46-year old post- independence Kenya. But those actions should be strengthened and be made into routine practices that have a longer timeframe enabling one to build the much needed sustainability. It’s a widely known fact worldwide that road accidents cost huge amount of money let alone the lost human resources especially to the developing and undeveloped economies (WHO & World Bank report, 2004). The combined human and economic cost is simply not acceptable to poor countries that want to boost the standard of living of their majority population with very scarce resources. According to a recent report done jointly by the World Bank and the World Health Organisation (WHO) on road traffic injury prevention, road accident statistics are quickly becoming the global catastrophe as shown below. 1. 2 million People are estimated to die globally each year on our roads. That’s around 3,000 deaths daily of which 500 of them are children. ? 50 million people are estimates to be injured globally on road injuries each year, 15 million seriously. ? Developing countries account for more that 85% of the global death toll from road traffic crashes or accidents. ? The global finan cial cost of road traffic injuries is about 518 billion USD each year (about 2-4% of GDP). Such is cost is equivalent to 50% of the GDP of Africa the continent (Kenya Statistics, 2004). For males aged 15-44, road traffic injuries rank second (after HIV/AIDS) as the leading cause of premature death and ill health worldwide. ? By 2020, unless action is taken, road traffic injuries are predicted to rise to about 80% in low and middle income countries especially developing countries (WHO and World Bank report, 2004). Clearly, it is as difficult to accurately determine the economic burden of Africa's road traffic accidents, as it is to collate accident data in the first place. There are the problems of under-reporting to contend with, as well as different countries adopting different criteria e. . defining a road traffic accident fatality (Odero & Heda, 2003). Some countries define a fatality as one occurring on the scene, others for periods of 24 hours, three days or 30 days after the e vent (Bamburi Cement, 2009). Today road accidents are Africa's third biggest killer, after Malaria and HIV/AIDS (WHO & World Bank, 2004): Africa's roads are the most dangerous in the world, but with a growing awareness of the true cost of road accidents, initiatives are underway to dramatically improve their safety. Road traffic accidents are known to be a major cause of death and disability throughout the developing world, but nowhere is the problem as acute as sub-Saharan Africa. Bad roads, aged vehicles and lax regulations are all considered major contributing factors to Africa's road fatality and accident numbers, themselves three times as great as the continent's share of motor vehicles. It’s this nationally critical issue that we want to study and propose urgent remedial actions for organisations as well as non-governmental organisations operating in Kenya. . The main issues with road accidents in Kenya The key issues with the road accidents and road injuries in Kenya are not new. For our literature review, Kenya has had a long history of road safety initiatives that have not lived to deliver the much needed breakthrough results. In 1979 a National Road Safety project was initiated and implemented with funding from the Finnish government, though few results can be seen 30 years late r (Kenya Roads Board, 2009). Kenya looses about 3,000 persons every year through road accidents annually. About 13,000 people are injured of which 6,000 are seriously injured and need long term medical treatment (Saidi & Kahoro, 2001). Most of the people who die on road accidents are vulnerable road users. These include pedestrians, cyclists and motorcyclists (Kenya Police, Traffic department). The majority of most of the people losing their lives are the young people, young graduates who provide the much needed skills and human resources base the country and organisations are in dire need of. A common question not asked is why educate and train a professional for over 16 years, then lose him / her on the road just before he can be useful to the country or a business organisation. First, after a critical review on all road safety initiatives in Kenya, we find 3 main issues that we believe clearly explain the poor road safety record for the past 20-30 years. 1. What to do – we know what to do, but we have trouble implementing it 2. Implementation – the challenge with implementation is due to lack of capacity at 4 main levels †¢ Inadequate Human resources Inadequate Financial resources †¢ Lack of knowledge †¢ Lack of political will 3. Collaboration – Is it then possible to build a Private Public Sector Partnership Program (PPSPP) which will implement road safety measures that can make a difference to the nation and make Kenyan roads a safer place for our children and the future generation? Secondly, the economic cost to the country is inde ed very significant (WHO & World Bank, 2004). As noted earlier, the average cost of the road accidents and resulting injuries is about 2-4% of GDP per annum. In 2009, the IMF assessed the Kenya economy GDP to be about 30 billion USD, a 2% cost per annum will translate to 600 million USD (estimated about 50 billion Kenya Shillings in one single year). It’s not doubt that such colossal amount of wasted expenditure only comes second to the annual recurrent expenditure allocated in the annual budget to Education and Health budgets (Ministry of Finance, 2008). Such a burden has huge implication on the ability of the economy to meet its needs from meagre resources that are available for nation building. Thirdly, we have a public sector that does not see road transport and accidents as a key issue as long as it does not affect them or their families. This perspective does undermine any tangible progress in road safety initiatives as it’s created no sense of ownership on role as a general public (Kenya Police, Traffic department). 3. Other issues on road accidents in Kenya While the main issues have been addressed under section (3) above, the other issues that must be addressed include the following; ? Lack of a clear policy on road transport (review of the old traffic act is now mandatory). A clear policy will create guidelines to administer and manage the road safety roadmap. ? Poor enforcement of existing traffic rules particularly by the enforcement officers, mainly the traffic police. ? Rampant corruption within the traffic department. Corruption is perhaps the single largest bottleneck to enforcing the traffic rules and does in a way create an impunity culture for PSV drivers on our roads today (Transparency International, Kenya chapter, 2008). ? Lack of a clear ownership between the public sector and the private sector on the framework to deal with road carnage. A guideline which included an approved curriculum on training and licencing of all types of drivers. ? How to develop an axis to mobilise the public to take care and protect their lives and those of other road users. 4. The effect of road accidents to organisations Our research shows that road accidents do not respect any business entities, indeed their implications transverse all business organisations. B oth private and public institutions face the full blunt of road carnage in different ways as shown below; ? Loss of critical human resources and talents in organisations The primary age group heavily impacted by the road accidents are the young people between the ages of 15 – 44. This is usually the young professional age group that provides the much needed human resources in organisations. Road accidents take away the much needed source of talent as well as the future leaders in organisations (WHO & World Bank, 2004). ? Higher direct cost of doing business in the country Loss of lives through accidents results in increased business costs, organisations face both short term and long term treatment and medical expenses. The severe injuries require more long term medical costs that result in increased medical premiums and medical costs for an organisation. On the other hand, the lost man-hours cannot easily be compensated especially in the case of a fully trained, qualified and proficient staff member. ? Higher indirect cost of doing business compared to other countries In modern day settings, injuries to family members created more demand for employees, particularly if an employee’s relative suffers injuries after an accident. Such strain impacts on employee’s morale and ability to dedicate all his abilities to get his / her work done. In addition, accidents results in increases cost of road transport (through higher insurance premiums, higher fuel consumption and delays due to traffic congestion after accidents). The business partner involved in an accident has increased cost of losing an asset, which in most cases is indirectly passed onto the organisations. For government organisations e. g. public health hospitals (Kenyatta National Hospital), higher accident victims results in higher operating expenses which have to be funded by the central government through increase of taxes on an annual basis. Unpredictable business planning Businesses rely on predictable business environment to remain profitable and continue with their operations (Kumar & Subramanian, 2000, p. 1). Road accidents hinder the predictability of the business environment through delayed delivery timeliness and increased turn-around time for organisations. In nearly all cases, these additional costs must be paid for in full by the organisations i n question, resulting to lost productivity, efficiency and profitability. 5. How can organisations better manage the road safety challenge When we talked to a number of organisations in Nairobi, we notice how heavily they have invested in state of art security and alarm systems to protect their assets (money, machines, organisational documents, policies, trademarks and patents etcetera), but few if any have developed even a simple structure to safeguard the safety of their employees while on the road. It’s important to also include human resources as a critical resource for the organisation. A great proportion of companies have not developed sound plans to safeguard their most important asset (human resources), especially when they are on the road travelling while on the Job. While road safety from the office to work is largely seen as an issue for the employee to manage, it’s paramount that organisations and their management teams provide a clear framework to provide their employees with a road safety roadmap that will enhance their vigilance while on the road to and from work. People are the greatest asset an organisation can have today. Good employees are a source of competitive advantage for an organisation (Samson & Daft, 2009). A glimpse of the few organisations that have designed an effective road safety program in Kenya today especially, petroleum companies (e. g. Total Kenya and Bamburi Cement) highlights about 5 step action plan to set an effective road safety roadmap. Each organisation needs a clear roadmap which if well implemented and incorporated in the organisation systems, will lead to improvement of safety in most of our roads today and safe companies lost man hours, sick leave, absenteeism and higher medical bills. 1. Collect data At the beginning, the organisation should assess its specific road safety context by collecting road accident statistics (road fatalities, lost time injuries, medical injuries, and first-aid injuries) and define what is measurable. The data collected should then be analysed into critical information to aid in decision making. Second the organisation should define a road safety policy with clear milestones and key objectives to be monitored on a monthly basis. A regular and consistent monitoring mechanism should be designed by the organisation, to review its progress of its road safety objective. 2. Develop a road safety plan A road safety roadmap is a mandatory document for any organisation committed to ending the carnage on our roads today. The roadmap should be a well neat and elaborate plan of action on what the organisation wants to do in improving its road safety commitment and objectives. These action plans must address the challenges on policy, enforcement, ownership, and training and self renewal priorities for the organisation. 3. Resource the road safety plan A plan is ineffective without key resources being allocated to it. The organisation should identify and sufficiently allocate two main types of resources; (1) Financial resources and (2) Human resources (competent and well trained resources. . Launch urgent interventions A key lever for a road safety action plan is to address current major gaps with immediacy to build legitimacy in the roadmap. The key areas that require immediate intervention are on;- ? Speed ? Impaired driving ? Seat belts ? Helmets ? Road mapping ? Defensive driving training ? Emergency preparedness 5. Collaborate with others Finally the organisation should plan to share its best practi ces with other institutions as a way to benchmark performance and renew its practices both on local, regional and international levels. With increased collaboration and partnership with the public sector, with a shared vision, the challenge of the road accidents and injuries will be addressed head-on by all stakeholders hence creating a sustainable avenue to address this great challenge facing organisations in the 21st century. 6. Ethical and Legal Issues The key challenges towards realising an effective road safety program in any organisation is how candid data collected or observed will be shared across the organisations so that corrective actions (that may include sanctioning) can be applied. Most of the major changes in safety awareness remain with our culture (way of doing things here) or on changing individual behaviour and taking a personal commitment to protecting other people lives. Some of the common ethical dilemmas that managers face include the following; ? Can i report the Chief Executive, Senior Managers or a friendly colleague who i noted did not adhere to the company’s guidelines e. g. driving while speaking on mobile phone on the road? Will this affect my career or my relationship with my supervisor? Can staff be required to use the Alco-blow to detect the influence of alcohol (though this is not yet legalised in Kenya)? ? Can staff carry out safety initiatives away from the office e. g. monitor staff travelling for a weekend to upcountry and are not wearing seat belts? ? Can we terminate an employee who does not comply with the organisations code of conduct on safety? ? Should i disclose an accident or should i bribe the traffic policeman to be left scot-free. A reported accident my injure my career opportunities and limit subsequent promotion changes in future. On the legal side, the main challenge remains how to deal with corruption (so called white lies) both within and outside the organisation. ? Internally, this may not be a great issue as staff can be directly sanctioned in the line with staff standing instructions and their employment contract. ? However, externally the issue with corruption (rather falsification of accident information so as not be appear guilty) is a major setback for enforcing a successful road safety roadmap. According to Transparency International, the police department has year after year been rated as the most corrupt institution in Kenya. Can they be relied upon to book violation of a driver, pedestrian or other road user fairly and equitably? This remains a key component that requires constant collaboration and use of other tools e. g. global positioning systems (GPS) to address rampant cases of cheating on the part of employees (Transparency International, Kenya chapter report, 2008). 7. Conclusion In conclusion, there is no doubt that road accidents results in huge human and economic cost to our relatively poor country (WHO & World Bank, 2004). The lives that are lost on our roads every year are critical to achieve the economic objectives of the country and organisations as well. Similarly the country has to save money to be spent towards treating road injury victims rather than providing such much needed funds to other areas of economic growth e. g. to fund projects like free primary education (FPE), improve our road network (build and repair our roads) and provide the much needed medical facilities in public hospitals (equip public hospital better). As a country we cannot afford to lose 2% of annual GDP (about KShs 50 billion) on road accidents, related injuries and long term medical treatment to accident victims. If accidents can be avoided, these resources can be allocated to other critical areas of the economy and organisations can be able to improve their productivity and become more responsible citizens. The medium term impact on the economy is indeed catastrophic and as a country we will not be able to meet our vision 2030 to becoming an industrialised nation. It’s time for all Kenya, young and old to participate to improve their safety standards in our roads and make Kenya a safer country for our children future. As a nation we owe this to the future generations of this country. As noted by the World Bank and the World Health Organisation in 2004, unless action is taken, by the year 2020, road traffic injuries are predicted to rise to about 80% in low and middle income countries (developing countries). Our country will not be spared if it does not take immediate and more radical actions to manage the road safety issue. At today’s road accident frequency rate, road accidents will become the 2nd largest cause of death after Malaria in Kenya by the year 2020 and surpass HIV/AIDS as the 2nd largest killer (WHO & World Bank, 2004). This is confirms our recommendation that as a country we are sitting on a time bomb. Today is the time for you and me to develop our solid action plan, put these actions into practice and contribute towards improving the safety in our roads. BIBLIOGRAPHY 1. WHO & World Bank. (2004). World report on road traffic injuries prevention. Accessed on 4 January 2010 from http://www. ho. in/violence-injury-prevention. html 2. The Kenya Roads Board. Road accident statistics (2009). Accessed on 4 January 2010 from http://www. krb. go. ke. html 3. Bamburi Cement limited. Road safety campaign â€Å"Epuka Ajali† (2009). Accessed on 31 December 2009 from http://www. bamburicement. co. ke. html 4. Kenya Police. Traffic department. Accessed on 4 January 2010 from http://www. ken yapolice. go. ke. html 5. Kenya Statistics. (2004. ) Accessed on 4 January 2010 from http://www. unicef. org/infobycountry/kenya-statistics. html 6. Odero, W. K. & Heda, P. M. (2003). Road traffic injuries in Kenya, magnitude, causes and status of intervention. Inj Control saf promotion, Mar-June 10 (1-2). Pg 53-61 7. Saidi, H. S. & Kahoro, P. (2001). Experience with road traffic accidents violations at the Nairobi Hospital. East Africa Medical Journal, 78 (8). Pg 41-44 8. Samson, D & Daft, R. D. (2009). Fundamentals of Management. 3rd Asia Pacific Ed. Pg 170-206. 9. Kumar, K. & Subramanian, R. (1998). Navigating the External Environment. SAM Advanced management journal. Retrieved December 14, 2009 from HighBeam Research: http://www. highbeam. com/doc/1P1-5377780. html

Effect of Landslipe

Effects of Landslides Landslides are a major catastrophe the world as it is widespread andsignificant impact, including Malaysia. The effects of catastrophic landslides isdangerous to humans and to other living thingsFor example, the slope of the saturated with water to form debris flows or mudflows. Concentrated mixture of rock and mud may destroy the trees, houses, andcars and blocking the bridge. Mud mixed with river flow can cause devastatingflooding along the route. Similarly, the ice floes formed in the river caused by ice clogging the rivers andflows more slowly.However, it can produce enough energy to destroy the bridge. Icemay accumulate on the edge or on top of weak layers of snow or unstable causescrash occurred. Pyroclastic flows (pyroclastic) arising from dust debris of ash, poisonous gasand hot rock from volcanic eruptions that spread quickly to eat anything that traveledto the effects of destruction and death. Among the social effects that can be described as: 1. Econo mic Decline Landslides are certainly cause damage to property. This brings losses to theeconomy of a country. Economic rehabilitation is also needed in the area that hasexperienced a landslide.This would cost a lot and some of the offending countryeconomy. Example:1. A average, these landslides caused loss of $ 1-2 billion U. S. dollars and 25disaster in the United States each year. 2. At Utah, U. S. , in 1983, the total cost to repair the landslide area of 500 milliondollars and it is financing the cost of the most expensive landslide in U. S. history3. Loss due to landslides in the United States is estimated at 1. 5 billion dollarsannually. 4. Earthquake the earth Loma Prieta in October 1989 caused thousands of landslides covering an area of 5400 square feet.Causing losses of at least $10 million dollars . 2 . Damage To Infrastructure. Landslides can lead to damage to property resulting from the force flow or mud. Infrastructure land such as buildings, roads, places of leisure and so on can bedestroyed by the landslide occurred. Example:1. Destruction a building and placement. 2. Land massive collapse can cause the destruction of a city. 3. Damage to roads4. Affect communication system of roads and communication systems. Loma prieta5. Earthquake the earth in October 1989 resulted in tens of thousands of experienced landslides with an area up to 5400 square feet.Cause affectedroad communication system, property damage and destruction of homes. 6. At Alpine Valley, as a result of the City causing damage to the bridge flows asa result of the power flow. 7. Slip Estate Park Hill View occur on 20 Nov 2002 destroyed a bungalow. 8. May 15, 1999, thousands of residents in housing estates and the InternationalBukit Wangsa Ukay in Jalan Hulu Klang trapped when a landslide occurred inthe 100 meter event 5:20 am that closed the only road out into theneighborhood 3. Loss Of Life.Loss of life is a dangerous effect upon the occurrence of a landslide and it isdifficult to a void. Many lives will be lost upon the occurrence of landslidesExample:1. Landslide Estate Park Hill View occur on 20 November 2002 destroyed ahouse killing eight bungalows and family life. 2. Landslide in Highland Tower, Ulu Kelang cause of 48 people were killed andmany injured. 3. Landslide in Wales in the UK involves the rotation of the fine debris thatoccurs on hill slopes have been destroys a school causing 144 people werekilled, including 116 school children involved, aged 7 to 10 years. . Changes In The Surface Landscape. Landslide causes significant changes in the landscape of the earth's surface. Pile of soil and mud from the landslide activity caused the high ground may be flatand settling sediment can become thick very quickly. Consequently, dam rivers or lakes become more shallow to hold a lot of water. Water level becomes higher andthe ground becomes waterlogged areas. Landslides can also cause soil or rock slope becomes increasingly steep andunstable.

Erich Hartmann - World War II Ace - Luftwaffe

Erich Hartmann - World War II Ace - Luftwaffe Erich Hartmann - Early Life Career: Born April 19, 1922, Erich Hartmann was the son of Dr. Alfred and Elisabeth Hartmann. Though born in Weissach, Wà ¼rttemberg, Hartmann and his family moved to Changsha, China shortly thereafter due to the severe economic depression that struck Germany in the years after World War I. Residing in a house on the Xiang River, the Hartmanns lived a quiet life while Alfred established his medical practice. This existence came to an end in 1928 when the family was forced to flee back to Germany following the outbreak of the Chinese Civil War. Sent to school in Weil im Schà ¶nbuch, Erich later attended schools in Bà ¶blingen, Rottweil, and Korntal. Erich Hartmann - Learning to Fly: As a child, Hartmann was first exposed to flying by his mother who was one of Germanys first female glider pilots. Learning from Elisabeth, he received his glider pilots license in 1936. That same year, she opened a flying school Weil im Schà ¶nbuch with the support of the Nazi government. Though young, Hartmann served as one of the schools instructors. Three years later, he earned his pilots license and was permitted to fly powered aircraft. With the beginning of World War II, Hartmann entered the Luftwaffe. Commencing training on October 1, 1940, he initially received an assignment to the 10th Flying Regiment in Neukuhren. The following year saw him move through a series of flight and fighter schools. n March 1942, Hartmann arrived at Zerbst-Anhalt for training on the Messerschmitt Bf 109. On March 31, he violated regulations by performing aerobatics over the airfield. Sanctioned to confinement and fines, the incident taught him self-discipline. In a twist of fate, the confinement saved Hartmanns life when a comrade was killed flying a training mission in his aircraft. Graduating in August, he had built a reputation as a skilled marksman and was assigned to Fighter Supply Group, East in Upper Silesia. In October, Hartmann received new orders assigning him to Jagdgeschwader 52 in Maykop, Soviet Union. Arriving on the Eastern Front, he was placed in Major Hubertus von Bonins III./JG 52 and mentored by Oberfeldwebel Edmund Roßmann. Erich Hartmann - Becoming an Ace: Entering combat on October 14, Hartmann performed poorly and crashed his Bf 109 when it ran out of fuel. For this transgression, von Bonin made him work for three days with the ground crew. Resuming combat flying, Hartmann scored his first kill on November 5 when he downed an Ilyushin Il-2. He shot down an additional aircraft before the end of the year. Gaining in skill and learning from skilled compatriots such as Alfred Grislawski and Walter Krupinski, Hartmann became more successful in early 1943. By the end of April he had become an ace and his tally stood at 11. Repeatedly encouraged to get closer to enemy aircraft by Krupinski, Hartmann developed his philosophy of when he [the enemy] fills the entire windscreen you cant miss. Using this approach, Hartmann began rapidly increasing his tally as Soviet aircraft fell before his guns. In the fighting that occurred during the Battle of Kursk that summer, his total reached 50. By August 19, Hartmann had downed another 40 Soviet aircraft. On that date, Hartmann was aiding in supporting a flight of Ju 87 Stuka dive bombers when the Germans encountered a large formation of Soviet aircraft. In the resulting fight, Hartmanns aircraft was badly damaged by debris and he came down behind enemy lines. Quickly captured, he feigned internal injuries and was placed in a truck. Later in the day, during a Stuka attack, Hartmann jumped his guard and escaped. Moving west, he successfully reached German lines and returned to his unit. Erich Hartmann - The Black Devil: Resuming combat operations, Hartmann was awarded the Knights Cross on October 29 when his kill total numbered 148. This number increased to 159 by January 1 and the first two months of 1944 saw him shoot down another 50 Soviet planes. An aerial celebrity on the Eastern Front, Hartmann was known by his call sign Karaya 1 and the distinctive black tulip design that was painted around the engine cowling of his aircraft. Feared by the Russians, they gave the German pilot the sobriquet The Black Devil and avoided combat when his Bf 109 was spotted. In March 1944, Hartmann and several other aces were ordered to Hitlers Berghof in Berchtesgaden to receive awards. At this time, Hartmann was presented with the Oak Leaves to the Knights Cross. Returning to JG 52, Hartmann began engaging American aircraft in the skies over Romania. Clashing with a group of P-51 Mustangs on May 21 near Bucharest, he scored his first two American kills. Four more fell to his guns on June 1 near PloieÅŸti. Continuing to run up his tally, he reached 274 on August 17 to become the top-scorer of the war. On the 24th, Hartmann downed 11 aircraft to reach 301 victories. In the wake of this achievement, Reichsmarschall Hermann Gà ¶ring immediately grounded him rather than risk his death and a blow to Luftwaffe morale. Summoned to the Wolfs Lair in Rastenburg, Hartmann was given the Diamonds to his Knights Cross by Hitler as well as a ten-day leave. During this period, the Luftwaffes Inspector of Fighters, Adolf Galland, met with Hartmann and asked him to transfer to the Messerschmitt Me 262 jet program. Erich Hartmann - Final Actions: Though flattered, Hartmann declined this invitation as he preferred to stay with JG 52. Galland again approached him in March 1945 with the same offer and was again rebuffed. Slowly increasing his total through the winter and spring, Hartmann reached 350 on April 17. With the war winding down, he scored his 352nd and final victory on May 8. Finding two Soviet fighters performing aerobatics on the last day of the war, he attacked and downed one. He was prevented in claiming the other by the arrival of American P-51s. Returning to base, he directed his men to destroy their aircraft before moving west to surrender to the US 90th Infantry Division. Though he had surrendered to the Americans, the terms of the Yalta Conference dictated that units that had largely fought on the Eastern Front were to capitulate to the Soviets. As a result, Hartmann and his men were turned over to the Red Army. Erich Hartmann - Postwar: Entering Soviet custody, Hartmann was threatened and interrogated on several occasions as the Red Army attempted to compel him to join the newly formed East German Air Force. Resisting, he was charged with bogus war crimes which included killing civilians, bombing a bread factory, and destroying Soviet aircraft. Found guilty after a show trial, Hartmann was sentenced to twenty-five years of hard labor. Moved between work camps, he was finally released in 1955 with the aid of West German Chancellor Conrad Adenauer. Returning to Germany, he was among the last prisoners of war to be released by the Soviet Union. After recovering from his ordeal, he joined the West German Bundesluftwaffe. Given command of the services first all-jet squadron, Jagdgeschwader 71 Richthofen, Hartmann had the noses of their Canadair F-86 Sabres painted with his distinctive black tulip design. In the early 1960s, Hartmann vigorously opposed the Bundesluftwaffes purchase and adoption of the Lockheed F-104 Starfighter as he believed the aircraft to be unsafe. Overruled, his concerns proved true when over 100 German pilots were lost in F-104-related accidents. Increasingly unpopular with his superiors due to continued criticism of the aircraft, Hartmann was forced into early retirement in 1970 with the rank of colonel. Becoming a flight instructor in Bonn, Hartmann flew demonstration shows with Galland until 1974. Grounded in 1980 due to heart problems, he resumed flying three years later. Increasingly withdrawing from public life, Hartmann died on September 20, 1993 in Weil im Schà ¶nbuch. The highest scoring ace of all-time, Hartmann was never downed by enemy fire and never had a wingman killed. Selected Sources Aces of World War II: Erich HartmannLuftwaffe: Erich HartmannWorld War II: Erich Hartmann