I don’t think it’s anything to do with case, just that the gender of the word is different between the dialects. ‘en’ or ‘a’ is just a suffix meaning ‘the’.
I'm not sure about that particular dialect, if it's case or not, but it's a fact that some dialects do keep the dative (though it's been disappearing somewhat recently). In addition to certain country-wide expressions which have kept old case forms, like "gå mann av huse", and "i live" (being alive), though I've recently seen so-called "journalists" in newspapers being unable to understand it and writing "i livet" instead, which has a totally different meaning.
It is certainly possible that a word may differ in gender between dialects. But the way dative is normally expressed in Norwegian dialects is that masculine words get the normal feminine ending and feminine words get the masculine one.
Oh right, I didn’t know that! I still don’t imagine that’s what is happening in this case; there are just plenty more feminine nouns in Nynorsk and similar dialects.
I don’t think it’s a ridiculous point, especially taken with the other elements mentioned. There wouldn’t be that much to the artists you mentioned if their lyrics were also banal, and they were deemed artificial or derivative. It’s a good idea to rely on a constraint of simplicity in some aspects, it’s just a problem when applied to everything at once.
Annoyingly, they were also unwilling to refund me when I wasn’t able to even start to download a game I’d bought for over a week, due to a faulty console update patch. After over a week of back and forth emails (pointing out that I hadn’t yet lost my right of refund), they fixed the issue.
You certainly find this kind of thing in numerous beginner books, but I’m skeptical that it’d be of much use for complex scores, or for someone with mastery of sight-reading. We don’t tend to do the same for text, after all. That said, it is easy enough to miss a dynamic marking and plough through a section at the wrong volume. That one might be worthwhile!
Not really. 2 crucial differences: first, it’s the degree of the scale (I, ii, III…) that’s given a colour rather than the note name (C, D, E…), meaning the colouring is independent of the key (or octave) it is written in or transposed into. Secondly, the colours used are designed to be similar where their harmonic ‘meaning’ is similar (according to traditional Western music) and vice versa.
I don't know about the rest of European countries but in Sweden the regional governments purchase the service from private companies for a fixed price over a 4 year contract. Every time the contract is up for renewal they ask for bids from all eligible companies so there is competition to place the lowest price based on requirements.
We have this in the UK, at least for trains. Companies just end up bidding the lowest, knowing there's no way they can provide a reasonable service at that price. They then cut back on trains and quality, and eventually the contracts are cancelled.
The complete fucking fiasco that new thameslink bidder is a good (bad) example and good only knows its doing to the Siemens brand due to the crappy cheap trains they have brought from them.
The Uk system is also skewed by the bidders also having to say how much £ they will return to the government.
From what I can tell, something similar happens in Norway.
If I recall correctly, the city busses, airport transportation busses, and the long-distance busses are different companies (or at least theoretically can be). The taxis are another company altogether.
True, but it gradually consolidates with time. There used to be several city bus companies here in Bergen, then just two, then they merged into one. Municipality was major stakeholder in both and encouraged the merger. City tram is a separate company but also owned by the municipality.
Taxis are a different story, most of them are private franchizes and it's working pretty well. Part of the reason ridesharing services were unable to gain any foothold here I believe.
This seems to be an uninformed statement, I have to say after reading some of the already existing replies and what I know about one of the largest markets:
Germany's railway (DB - Deutsche Bahn) has been privatized and they make a profit on long-distance high-speed routes. Local routes are purchases service from a variety of smaller local train companies that sprung up, and also from DB. Ticketing can be very messy, and you have to read the small print to know where some special applies. For example, some regional ticket (one or two states) may restrict you to certain providers and routes.
> Germany's railway (DB - Deutsche Bahn) has been privatized
This… isn't true.
Deutsche Bahn AG is a private company, yes, but its 100% owned by the federal government.
> they make a profit on long-distance high-speed routes
DB Fernverkehr AG (the long-distance subsidiary) do this by operating them on an entirely commercial basis: they make a profit in part because they only run services that are profitable. The same is true of the companies competing on long-distance services (which are admittedly relatively few and far between, undoubtedly in part because of the huge start-up costs).
> Local routes are purchases service from a variety of smaller local train companies that sprung up, and also from DB.
Here's where it gets complicated: this depends on the state (within Germany) and how they arrange public transport. The primary services are typically put out to tender (and how differs between the states) and these aren't necessarily run by DB (through its Regio subsidiary) as DB Regio has lost a number of bids.
At the same time, even on track, there's far more competition when it comes to profitable routes, as various local train companies as you mention have started competing.
> Deutsche Bahn AG is a private company, yes, but its 100% owned by the federal government.
Which does not change the fact that it's been made into a private company, and that their mission is profit. Ever since that happened we've been hearing it in the news whenever they announced their results, apparently the whole country, or at least media and the government care very much about it. So they are not like a government agency at all, they really are a business.
So OPs statement is not true, competition (on the local routes) and profitability very much drive DB. That was my point, in the context of the comment I replied to.
OK, to me it being a private company doesn't in and of itself imply that: a private company generally acts in the interests of its shareholders, and when the sole shareholder of a company is the state, it doesn't necessarily follow the primary interest is profit (see many of the various companies wholly held by the UK Government for example, Network Rail being an apt one here).
As I said, the DB's mission is profit. That is what they make a big fuss about every year, and according to all news reports since making it a company that is what their CEO is meant to look after first of all even if it means worse service. You can see that in the discussion of preceding years that maintenance was neglected and too much "optimization" (e.g. work force size) was done so that they now frequently run into problems. It's all been discussed in German media for years.
Statistically, you would expect them to score higher if that was the case, because it would no longer allow them to be worse than the worst song to qualify.
The effects of partisanship are hugely outweighed by the fact that each country gives points to 10 others, not just one. An extreme case of both the 10 and 12 points going to non-deserving neighbours still leaves 36 points to go elsewhere.
It’s the way it was written. A negative point then point out they’re white men to amplify the negativity.
I think she has some good points but seems to have a strong world view that is biasing the article away from her key points. Not that there is anything wrong with expressing your self this way but she does seem to have something against white men.
Would you say that a disproportion alone is an indication of racism? If so, would you expect every single metric to be a perfect 50/50 proportion or are we doomed to always be confined to - a bigger or smaller - discrimination, because we'll always deviate in some metrics?
Not necessarily, but for a field that concerns itself with drawing conclusions about the human condition, often relying on experiential evidence, something has certainly gone very wrong if so few women are part of it.
Well if it's not racism, then what explains it? And what explains why the ratio of women to men gets significantly lower past Bachelor's level degrees in philosophy? I really don't think it's contentious to say that that there's a severe cultural exclusion within philosophy and the way it tends to be taught.
what do you propose is happening in these philosophy classes that is so racist and sexist to chase away all the women and ethnic minorities? It must be like an Ivy League frat house to go from 50/50 to 95/5 in gender representation.
It's a number of things: some of which the article explains. I think the two most important reasons are that there's a culture that often mistakes aggressive debate for good philosophy. Not that white men tend to have these traits, but the people with these traits tend to be white men. Secondly, your perception of how relevant, or how alien and detached current philosophical thought seems to be, is going to depend on where you sit yourself; someone with a privileged upbringing is going to be much more comfortable sitting through a course that treats injustice, for example, as an abstract concept.
so correct me if I'm wrong but the serious problem with racism and sexism in academic philosophy is that academics want to debate (which involves critiquing ideas) and that they want to discuss ideas and concepts rather than taking to the streets in protest or otherwise skipping the ideas and going straight to execution? I recognise I'm being a bit reductionist but you have to see these criticisms are insane.
[edit] or at least, to call them racist/sexist is insane. I can somewhat understand the latter criticism coming from the perspective of someone who wants to do something about injustice, but then why are you in academic philosophy? That isn't where real-world change happens, people like that would be better off getting involved in social activism, whether they continue working in academia or not.
It is of course more akin to anti-semitism. Which is in essence a resentment against a more successful and influential class of people.
To be sure in all of these divides there is some substance to both sides (otherwise there wouldn't be an issue, all racism would marginalised flat earth level nonsense).
Also there are big problems with your conclusion. Philosophy departments are going to be overwhelmingly left leaning, so shouldn't that be an environment that doesn't exclude? Unless we conclude that virtually all left wing positions are just posturing, or that the problem isn't racism.
