Reproduction de : Thèse de doctorat : Histoire : Lyon 2 : 2004. / Titre provenant de l'écran-titre. Bibliogr.

Abstract This study was a case control field investigation of a special population. The psychodiagnostic and personality correlates of 40 Christian Charismatic exorcism-seekers were compared to the correlates of 40 matched c2ntrols and 48 randomly selected controls. The study was guided by a central research question: how do exorcism-seekers differ from similar individuals who do not seek exorcism? Two theoretiäal approaches to demonic possession and exorcism anticipated different answers. A mental illness approach anticipated the report of certain forms of clinical distress among exorcism-seekers. A social role approach anticipated the report of certain personality traits that would facilitate the effective enactment of the demoniac role. Results supported the mental illness approach to demonic possession inasmuch as numerous between-group diagnostic differences achieved statistical significance, especially mood disturbance. The exorcism-seeker’s group produced a modal dependent-avoidant personality disorder profile, although schizoid features best distinguished between exorcism-seekers and control subjects. However, half of the sample did not report significant psychological distress. A cognitive-behavioral model of demonic possession of relevance to both distressed and non-distressed exorcism-seekers was therefore proposed. Treatment implications included a discussion of special treatment problems and collaboration between members of the clergy and the health care professions.

Turtas, įgytas po santuokos sudarymo, yra bendroji jungtinė sutuoktinių nuosavybė, išskyrus asmenine nuosavybe esantį sutuoktinių turtą. Preziumuojama, kad sutuoktinių bendro turto dalys yra lygios, nepriklausomai nuo to, kurio sutuoktinio ar jų abiejų vardu turtas įgytas. Ši nuostata kyla iš sutuoktinių lygiateisiškumo principo, o tai reiškia, kad nei vienam iš sutuoktinių nėra suteikiama daugiau teisių į bendrą turtą nei turi kitas sutuoktinis. Sutuoktiniai turi teisę sudaryti vedybų sutartį ir bendru susitarimu nustatyti, koks teisinis režimas bus taikomas jų iki santuokos turėtam bei santuokos metu įgytam turtui. Išimtis – sutuoktiniai negali pakeisti šeimos turto teisinio režimo. Bendrąja jungtine sutuoktinių nuosavybe esantį turtą sutuoktiniai valdo, naudoja ir juo disponuoja bendru susitarimu. Preziumuojama, kad sandorį sudarantis sutuoktinis veikia kito sutuoktinio sutikimu, kiti sąžiningi asmenys, sudarantys sandorius su sutuoktiniais, turi teisę šio fakto netikrindami manyti, kad sandoris sudaromas abiejų sutuoktinių sutikimu. Bendrą turtą gali tvarkyti ir vienas iš sutuoktinių, tačiau jis tam turi turėti kito sutuoktinio išduotą įgaliojimą. Šeimos turtas - tai nuosavybės teise vienam arba aniems sutuoktiniams priklausanti šeimos gyvenamoji patalpa ir kilnojamieji daiktai, būtini šeimos poreikiams tenkinti. Turtui, šeimos turto teisinis režimas taikomas nuo santuokos įregistravimo momento. Disponuojant šeimos turtu keliami griežtesni reikalavimai nei disponuojant... [toliau žr. visą tekstą] / Possession which was acquired after the marriage is a joint possession of a married couple, except possession which is a personal ownership. We should assume, that shared pieces of married couple‘s possession are equal, despite the name of a person, whose name was used to obtain the possession. This attitude comes from equality of rights principle of a married couple which means that neither from a married couple could be given more rights to a shared possession than other have. Married couple may make a contract of marriage and with collaborative covenant determine a type of juridical treatment, which should be applied for a possession, obtained before and after the marriage. There is an exception – married couple may not change their juridical treatment for their possession. Joint possession of a married couple is controlled, used and disposed with collaborative agreement. We should assume, that a spouse who is making a contract is behaving with other spouse‘s permission. Other conscientious people, who are making a contracts with a married couple, have a right to assume that a contract is being made with both of couple‘s agreement, without inspecting this fact. Shared possession may be managed with one of a married couple, however he must have another‘s authorization. Families possession – is one‘s or both‘s of married couple ownership of families living space and portable goods, essential for families needs. Juridical treatment for a family possession is applied from the... [to full text]

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Washington, 1990. / Vita. Includes bibliographical references (leaves [358]-362).

Thesis (doctoral)--Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen.

Longtemps considérées comme de regrettables anomalies altérant la figure du propriétaire, unique souverain sur sa chose, les techniques du démembrement et de l’indivision sont désormais incontournables. Parce qu’elles permettent de multiplier, sur un même bien, le nombre de bénéficiaires des utilités qu’il procure, ces modes d’attribution provoquent la mise en concurrence d’une pluralité d’intérêts qui, lorsqu’ils divergent, sont source de conflits de pouvoirs. Tandis que ces conflits se résolvent ordinairement grâce à l’application des règles propres à chacune de ces techniques, la situation se complexifie néanmoins lorsque plusieurs d’entre-elles s’agrègent sur un même bien. Cet enchevêtrement de modes hétéroclites d’attribution des utilités est source de confusions : quotes-parts indivises, usufruits, droits d’usage et autres servitudes s’entrecroisent, troublant d’autant la lecture correcte de la répartition des prérogatives entre les différents titulaires de droits sur le bien. Déterminer avec justesse l’étendue des pouvoirs de chacun d’eux nécessite donc de questionner l’articulation des différents droits réels en présence pour mettre en exergue leurs convergences et oppositions. Ce faisant, l’analyse méthodique de ces enchevêtrements de droits permet de dévoiler l’existence de véritables structures combinatoires organisant les différents modes d’attribution. Étudier le contentieux sous l’angle de ces différentes combinaisons permet de résoudre plus aisément les conflits résultant de ces enchevêtrements de droits, tout en proposant une systématisation intelligible des différentes règles et décisions gouvernant la matière / Long regarded as unfortunate anomalies altering the figure of the unique owner of its object, the techniques of dismemberment and joint possession are now unavoidable. The main reason being that they enable one to multiply, on a particular object, the number of beneficiaries of the utilities that they offer, these modes of attribution result in creating a competition of varied interests which, when diverging, lead to conflicting powers. If these conflicts can naturally be solved by applying the specific rules attached to each of these techniques, the situation becomes far more complex when several aggregate around the same thing. This entanglement of these heterogeneous modes of allocation to these utilities is a source of great confusion. Undivided shares, usufruct, user rights and other easements then come into contact, disturbing the correct reading of the distribution of prerogatives between the different holders of rights over the thing. Determining with accuracy the extent of the powers of everyone of them requires one to question the articulation of the real and actual rights in order to highlight their conveniences and oppositions. In doing so, the methodical analysis of this entanglement of rights makes it possible to reveal the existence of true combinatorial structures that frame and organize the diverse existing modes of allocation. While a few of these structures seem to allow a fairly equal treatment of rights over the object, other structures tend to organize them into a hierarchy

Abstract This study was a case control field investigation of a special population. The psychodiagnostic and personality correlates of 40 Christian Charismatic exorcism-seekers were compared to the correlates of 40 matched c2ntrols and 48 randomly selected controls. The study was guided by a central research question: how do exorcism-seekers differ from similar individuals who do not seek exorcism? Two theoretiäal approaches to demonic possession and exorcism anticipated different answers. A mental illness approach anticipated the report of certain forms of clinical distress among exorcism-seekers. A social role approach anticipated the report of certain personality traits that would facilitate the effective enactment of the demoniac role. Results supported the mental illness approach to demonic possession inasmuch as numerous between-group diagnostic differences achieved statistical significance, especially mood disturbance. The exorcism-seeker’s group produced a modal dependent-avoidant personality disorder profile, although schizoid features best distinguished between exorcism-seekers and control subjects. However, half of the sample did not report significant psychological distress. A cognitive-behavioral model of demonic possession of relevance to both distressed and non-distressed exorcism-seekers was therefore proposed. Treatment implications included a discussion of special treatment problems and collaboration between members of the clergy and the health care professions. / Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies / Graduate

The goal of this study is to confirm Eurasia as an independent linguistic area with respect to four features of possessive morphology: locus of marking, position of pronominal possessive affixes, obligatory possessive inflection, and possessive classification. Raw data on these features was taken from the WALS database and then run through an algorithm of genealogical stratification called g-sampling, in order to minimize the bias of the sample. The resulting g-units were then categorized by type and geographical area (New World vs. Old World, Eurasia vs. the rest of the world). These counts were tested for significance using Fisher's exact test. Two features, locus of marking and possessive classification, were confirmed to be significantly different in Eurasia; the other two features were not significantly different. Possible reasons for these areal patterns-primarily structural reasons-are briefly discussed.

Possession is an asymmetric semantic relation between two entities, where one entity (the possessee) belongs to the other entity (the possessor). Automatically extracting possessions are useful in identifying skills, recommender systems and in natural language understanding. Possessions can be found in different communication modalities including text, images, videos, and audios. In this dissertation, I elaborate on the techniques I used to extract possessions. I begin with extracting possessions at the sentence level including the type and temporal anchors. Then, I extract the duration of possession and co-possessions (if multiple possessors possess the same entity). Next, I extract possessions from an entire Wikipedia article capturing the change of possessors over time. I extract possessions from social media including both text and images. Finally, I also present dense annotations generating possession timelines. I present separate datasets, detailed corpus analysis, and machine learning models for each task described above.

Thèse numérisée par la Division de la gestion de documents et des archives de l'Université de Montréal.