A landscape of data – working with digital resources within and beyond DARIAH
The way researchers in the arts and humanities disciplines work has changed significantly. Research can no longer be done in isolation as an increasing number of digital tools and certain types of knowledge are required to deal with research material. Research questions are scaled up and we see the emergence of new infrastructures to address this change. The DigitAl Research Infrastructure for the Arts and Humanities (DARIAH) is an open international network of researchers within the arts and humanities community, which revolves around the exchange of experiences and the sharing of expertise and resources. These resources comprise not only of digitised material, but also a wide variety of born-digital data, services and software, tools, learning and teaching materials. The sustaining, sharing and reuse of resources involves many different parties and stakeholders and is influenced by a multitude of factors in which research infrastructures play a pivotal role. This article describes how DARIAH tries to meet the requirements of researchers from a broad range of disciplines within the arts and humanities that work with (born-)digital research data. It details approaches situated in specific national contexts in an otherwise large heterogeneous international scenario and gives an overview of ongoing efforts towards a convergence of social and technical aspects.
Conference abstracts for DHd2017, Bern. (http://www.dhd2017.ch/)
We describe the creation of a corpus of Russian-language drama, comprising hundreds of texts from the middle of the 18th century to the first third of the 20th century. Texts are encoded in the XML-based markup standard TEI, the focus is on extra-linguistic, structural annotations, although additional annotation layers can be added easily.
The United Nation’s 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) offer an extensive framework for coordinating and shaping government policies, and for engaging the public with sustainability. Public understanding of the SDGs and sustainability can influence this engagement, as people are more likely to accept and share information consistent with their own understanding. We identify public understandings of SDGs through mental maps of how people relate the SDGs to environmental, social and economic sustainability. Using responses from 12 developed/developing countries (n = 2,134), we identified four mental maps that varied mainly on two dimensions, which diverged from some expert models. Some people’s mental maps identified tension between achieving environmental versus social sustainability, whereas for others the tension was between economic sustainability and the other two sustainability elements. Some people related different SDGs to each element of sustainability, whereas others saw all SDGs as targeting the same sustainability element(s). These findings highlight opportunities and challenges to engage the public with sustainability more effectively, especially with wide-ranging initiatives such as a Green New Deal. We observed cultural differences but we also identified a dominant mental map across countries that could serve as a default model for communicating sustainability internationally.
The paper provides findings of the research work and scientific discussions under the “Global Sustainability Strategy Forum” (GSSF) that aims to develop evidence-informed judgments on challenges and solutions. It views attaining sustainability as a set of closely-coupled societal and environmental challenges and opportunities that require integration of multiple disciplines, new research methods, and new knowledge sources with sensitivity to regional and cultural diversities. The project is designed to produce innovative insights and strategies to support effective governance of transitions to sustainability of our complex global social-ecological system within its inherent resource limitations, and to develop sustainable lifestyles that are practical and appealing in the different regions and cultures of the world.
In 19th century Germany, the number of publications in the history of philosophy increased dramatically. According to Schneider’s (1999) calculations, from 1810 through 1899, 148 original textbooks by 114 authors were published in German. The aim of this article is to analyse how the documented in these publications canonic vision of 19th century German philosophy evolved. An analysis of 66 treatises published from 1802 through 1918 allows dividing 19th century philosophers into groups based on the frequency of their names across the tables of contents, describing the changes in the leading group composition and in the share of attention received by a given philosopher over time (the patterns of attention for Kant, Fichte, Hegel, Schelling, Herbart, Schleiermacher, Schopenhauer, Jacobi and Fries are discussed in detail). The paper presents thus a formal analysis of how historical reputations of philosophers were made, how they stabilised, or faded. The authors claim that the current understanding of the history of 19th century philosophy differs significantly from the one recorded in the German textbooks of the era (e.g. Herbart’s key position within the 19th century philosophical Canon; Schopenhauer’s recognition by university philosophers during his own lifetime).
Since 2006, DARIAH has been building a digital research infrastructure for the arts and humanities. The article describes this development and examines the relatively short history of research infrastructures – a scientific innovation of the 20th century – in the arts and humanities.
The prospects of various interdisciplinary researches, the problem of the unity of scientific knowledge, the possibility of translating methods from one discipline to another, the impact of digitalization on various fields of scientific knowledge, the acceptability of general approaches to science management, in particular, to the evaluation of scientific productivity are debated in the discussion on the limits of methodological convergence of natural-scientific and social-humanitarian knowledge. The debaters Н.N. Knyazeva, G.L. Tulchinsky, V.G. Kuznetsov and N.M. Smirnova comment on each other’s positions, point out the strengths and weaknesses in proponents’ justification, agree on a number of issues, and indicate the main theses and arguments for each position, groping for prospects for further development of the discussed issues.
Within a brief historical period, BRICS as an inter-State association has become an influential player in the world economy and politics. BRICS is a primarily political entity, and in that regard, the BRICS grouping correlates with the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO). However, not all the expectations placed on the SCO by the founding countries at the time of its creation in 2001 have been met so far. The question is to what extent expectations may be fulfilled in case of BRICS.
The article identifies the effect of personalization of politics: its definition is given, the determinants and possible consequences are considered. That effect is illustrated by some features in the Asian and European style of modern political leadership.