Integrale DBFM-contracten in de transportinfrastructuur zijn nieuw en het duurt nog jaren voordat de eerste contracten aflopen. Om eerder al een indruk te krijgen van de prestatie van DBFM is systematische evaluatie nodig. Maar hoe evalueer je projectresultaten die in een wirwar van complexiteit tot stand komen? Net zoals smaakvolle gerechten tot stand komen door de juiste combinatie van ingrediënten is het zaak om de juiste elementen binnen DBFM te selecteren en te evalueren.
In this paper, we argue that beyond understanding nations as imagined communities, the metaphor of an ‘imagined family’ or ‘filial community’ is a more useful concept towards understanding links between gender and nationhood as family relations in four ways: (1) providing a clear, hierarchical structure; (2) prescribing social roles and responsibilities; (3) being linked to positive affective connotations; and (4) reifying social phenomena as biologically determined. In order to empirically substantiate our claim, we will explore the prevalence and use of family metaphors in a key symbol of nationhood discourses. Through a qualitative analysis of national anthems as ‘mnemonics of national identity’, we demonstrate the widespread presence of family metaphors, discussing how they reproduce ideas of family and gender. Finally, we discuss how the ‘imagined family’ as present in anthems and other forms of national representation could inform future studies of nationalism and national politics.
The present research integrates and extends existing approaches to measuring self-enhancement in interpersonal relationships.
We composed a dyadic self-enhancement index by contrasting self-perceptions with the academic achievements of both dyad members and disentangled the effects of the perceivers, the targets, and the relationships by using social relations analyses. At two different levels, we examined the interpersonal consequences of self-enhancement in 330 eighth-grade students. Results revealed that, at a habitual level, the more students tended to feel unrealistically superior to other students, the more they tended to dislike others, yet this did not affect how much others disliked them. However, at a relationship level, we found different effects in specific relationships between individuals: The more a student felt unrealistically superior to a specific other student, the less he or she liked the other student, and the less he or she was liked by that student.
This paper provides an account of the argument/adjunct distinction implementing the ‘canonical
approach’. I identify five criteria (obligatoriness, latency, co-occurrence restrictions,
grammatical relations, and iterability) and seven diagnostic tendencies that can be used to
distinguish canonical arguments from canonical adjuncts. I then apply the criteria and
tendencies to data from the Nakh-Daghestanian language Hinuq. Hinuq makes extensive use of
spatial cases for marking adjunct-like and argument-like NPs. By means of the criteria and
tendencies it is possible to distinguish spatial NPs that come close to canonical arguments from
those that are canonical adjuncts, and to place the remaining NPs bearing spatial cases within
the argument-adjunct continuum.
Metaethics is traditionally understood as a non-moral discipline that examines moral judgements from a standpoint outside of ethics. This orthodox understanding has recently come under pressure from anti-Archimedeans, such as Ronald Dworkin and Matthew Kramer, who proclaim that rather than assessing morality from an external perspective, metaethical theses are themselves substantive moral claims. In this paper, I scrutinise this anti-Archimedean challenge as applied to the metaethical position of expressivism. More precisely, I examine the claim that expressivists do not avoid moral commitments when accounting for moral thought, but instead presuppose them; they do not look at ethics from the outside, but operate from within ethics. This paper defends the non-moral status of expressivism against anti-Archimedeanism by rejecting a new anti-Archimedean challenge which, on the basis of Hume’s Law, aims to exploit expressivist explanations of supervenience in order to show that expressivism is a substantive moral position.