No description available.

Research question: 1. How have famous people in images contributed to the spread of #BlackLivesMatter’s message? 2. How can the content in the image be tied to the BlackLivesMatter movement.   Aim: The aim of this study is to research how famous people have appeared in images and in a what way they have contributed to spread of #BlackLivesMatter’s message   Method and material: A case study will be performed on the collected material from  two specific case-events that are affiliated to the movement. The material will be analyzed with a semiotic method with guidelines by Hansen and Machin (2013). All material is collected online and consists pictures that can be connected to BlackLivesMatter on a denotative or connotative level.   Main results: This study's result showed that different types of performances and appearances with famous people contributed to spreading BlackLivesMatter’s message. The contribution was visualized through performances, posing at events and music videos, and use of different objects such as clothing, people, hands, and/or posing that created connotative association which could be connected to the BlackLivesMatter movement.

Regression Wavelet Analysis (RWA) is a novel wavelet-based scheme for coding hyperspectral images that employs multiple regression analysis to exploit the relationships among spectral wavelet transformed components. The scheme is based on a pyramidal prediction, using different regression models, to increase the statistical independence in the wavelet domain For lossless coding, RWA has proven to be superior to other spectral transform like PCA and to the best and most recent coding standard in remote sensing, CCSDS-123.0. In this paper we show that RWA also allows progressive lossy-to-lossless (PLL) coding and that it attains a rate-distortion performance superior to those obtained with state-of-the-art schemes. To take into account the predictive significance of the spectral components, we propose a Prediction Weighting scheme for JPEG2000 that captures the contribution of each transformed component to the prediction process.

The development of communication technology has also created new structures, able to challenge the traditional power roles of the communicative process. Social media have become a fruitful arena of this change due to their users having the possibility to respond to the producers’ messages. Thus, the traditional lineal structure turns to an interactional one and consequently, the lines become blurred between the roles of the dominant and dominated as assumed by the senders/producers and the receivers respectively. Controversial issues shed light on this ‘battle for power’, such as the sustainability actions and reporting of Zara and H&M. These companies are the leaders of the fast fashion industry; one of the most ‘unsustainable’ fields. Through a critical discourse analysis of the posts that the companies launch on their Facebook-sponsored accounts as well as the comments related to sustainability that they obtain from their users, the communicative process occurring in social media can be assessed. The aim of this analysis is to provide an insight into how the communicative process between sender and receiver in social media creates public opinion and affects the development of sustainability discourse. It has been shown that users have found in social media a powerful tool to challenge the companies’ power: they can comment on the informative product in question. Also the users have taken the sustainability discourse as the required ‘object’ when questioning a product’s reliability. The latter is in some way another means with which to challenge the companies’ power.

The aim of the present study is to investigate how men and women in three Iranian Balochi dialects, Coastal Balochi, Koroshi Balochi and Sistani Balochi, refer to 3rd person participants in oral narratives of two genres: folktales and biographical tales. The stories that are analysed were recorded during several field trips to Iran and the approach used is that of Levinsohn (1994, 2015). The first part of the dissertation begins with an overview of the Balochi language and its dialects, including a brief presentation of its phonology, and then reviews previous studies of Balochi, before introducing the case system and types of alignment in the three dialects. Chapter 2 introduces the reader to the status of orality in the three dialects, before giving details about the corpus of texts that were analysed. Of particular note is the fact that each story in the corpus was told by both a man and a woman. Chapter 3 examines different approaches to the analysis of participant reference, before comparing those of Gundel et al. and Levinsohn in greater detail. The second part of the dissertation applies Levinsohn’s approach to texts in each of the three dialects in turn. Chapters 4–6 identify and analyse the different ways in which the participants in the stories are referred to when the subject remains the same and in three specific situations when the subject changes. This enables default encoding values to be established for each of the four situations. Motivations for over-encoding and, in some situations, under-encoding, are then identified. Chapters 7–9 investigate whether the gender of the storyteller (male versus female) and/or the genre of the story (folktale versus biographical tale) influence the way that the participants are referred to. This leads in chapter 10 to a gender- and genre-based comparison of participant reference across the present dialects. Conclusions are presented in chapter 11. In general, the participant reference strategy used was the same in all three dialects, regardless of the gender or the genre. The main exception involved reported conversations in Koroshi Balochi, where the additive enclitic ham was attached to the reference to a subject who responded in line with the contents of the speech reported in the previous sentence. Other variations appeared to depend on the degree to which the storyteller was proficient in his or her art. The dissertation concludes with four Appendices. Appendix A presents six texts that were interlinearised using the FLEx programme, while Appendix B consists of participant reference charts of the same texts following Levinsohn’s approach. Appendix C presents details of the case system and alignment for each of the three dialects. Finally, the chart in Appendix D compares the approaches of Levinsohn and of Gundel et al. to participant reference in a specific text. A CD with audio files of the six texts and some photos taken during fieldwork is also available.

Esta dissertação de mestrado apresenta um banco de figuras e palavras. O banco objetiva servir para a aumentar a validade e precisão dos instrumentos de avaliação, bem como a eficácia dos materiais instrucionais para desenvolvimento de linguagem. Este banco contém 971 entradas lexicais. Cada entrada contém uma figura e seu correspondente nome escrito. A figura é analisada em termos de grau de univocidade (grau de concordância na nomeação). O nome da figura é analisado separadamente em três formas: palavra escrita visível, palavra falada audível, e palavra falada visível (lida orofacialmente). Palavras escritas visíveis são compostas de grafemas. São analisadas em termos de seu grau de familiaridade e reconhecibilidade (grau em que pode ser lida via rota lexical) e decodificabilidade (grau em que pode ser lida pela rota perilexical ou fonológica). Palavras ouvidas audíveis são compostas de fonemas. São analisadas em termos do grau de cifrabilidade (grau de facilidade com que podem ser escritas via rota perilexical). Palavras faladas vistas são compostas de fanerolaliemas. São analisadas em termos do grau de legibilidade orofacial (grau em que podem ser compreendidas apenas pela visão), audibilizabilidade (grau em que a imagem auditiva dos fonemas pode ser evocada por fanerolaliemas durante a leitura orofacial visual), e cifrabilidade (grau de facilidade com que podem ser escritas via rota perilexical). O banco é composto de 971 entradas lexicais, cada qual composta de uma figura (à esquerda) e de vários dados pertinentes ao seu nome correspondente (à direita). O lado direito da entrada é composto de seis campos. O Campo 1 fornece o o nome da figura escrito em dois alfabetos: alfabeto romano e alfabeto fonético internacional. Ele também fornece a categoria semântica à qual pertence a palavra. O Campo 2 fornece o número da figura (para indexar todas as 971 figuras do banco). O Campo 3 fornece a univocidade da figura numa escala de 0-100 pontos separadamente para crianças de 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 7-10 anos de idade, bem como para adultos. O Campo 4 fornece a palavra escrita visível tal como analisada em termos de seu grau de familiaridade ou reconhecibilidade (grau em que pode ser lida via rota lexical) numa escala de 1-9 pontos, separadamente para crianças de 5º ano, 4º ano, 3º ano, 2º ano, e 1º ano. Nessa escala, 5 corresponde à média, 6 a 1 erro-padrão (EP) acima da média, 7 a 2 EP acima da média e assim por diante até 9; ao passo que 4 corresponde 1 EP abaixo da média, 3 a 2 EP abaixo da média, e assim por diante até 1. O Campo 5 é composto de quatro linhas, cada qual dividida em quatro colunas. A Linha 1 fornece o grau de decifrabilidade (grau com que pode ser lida pela rota perilexical) da palavra escrita visível, numa escala de 0-1. A Linha 2 fornece o grau de cifrabilidade da palavra ouvida (grau com que pode ser escrita pela rota perilexical), numa escala de 0-1. A Linha 3 fornece o grau de audibilizabilidade da palavra falada lida orofacialmente (grau com que sequência de fanerolaliemas pode ser convertida em sequência de fonemas), numa escala de 0-1. A Linha 3 fornece o grau de cifrabilidade da palavra falada lida orofacialmente (grau com que sequência de fanerolaliemas pode ser convertida em sequência de grafemas), numa escala de 0-1. Cada palavra é dividida em suas colunas. cada coluna fornece os dados referentes à linha em questão em uma de quatro formas diferentes. Nas Colunas 1 e 2, dados consistem na média das razões independente da incidência. Nas Colunas 3 e 4, dados consistem na média das razões ponderada por incidência diferencial. Nas Colunas 1 e 3 os dados consistem na média das razões independentemente da tonicidade da fala (seja ouvida ou vista) na pronúncia. Nas Colunas 2 e 4, os dados consistem na média das razões ponderada pela tonicidade diferencial da fala (seja ouvida ou vista) na pronúncia. Por exemplo, a Linha 1 fornece o grau de decifrabilidade grafema-fonema da palavra escrita visível. Na Coluna 1 decoficabilidade é calculada como mera média de razões independente da incidência ou tonicidade. Na Coluna 2 decodificabilidade é calculada como média das razões independente da incidência mas ponderasa pela tonicidade. Na Coluna 3 decodificabilidade é calculada como média de razões ponderadas em termos de incidência mas independente de tonicidade. Na Coluna 4 decodificabilidade é calculada como média de razões ponderadas em termos de incidência e de tonicidade. O Campo 6 fornece o grau de legibilidade orofacial da fala vista, numa escala de 0-1. O grau de legibilidade orofacial é apresentado em quatro formas. Nas Colunas 1 e 2 ela se encontra calculada segundo o modelo Dória; nas Colunas 3 e 4 ela se encontra calculada segundo o modelo Fonético-Articulatório. Nas Colunas 1 e 3 ela é calculada independentemente da tonicidade da pronúncia; nas Colunas 2 e 4 ela é calculada de modo ponderado pela tonicidade diferencial da pronúncia / This master\'s thesis presents a new sourcebook aimed at increasing the validity and precision of language assessment tools, as well as the efficacy of instructional materials for language development. The sourcebook contains 971 lexical entries. Each entry contains a picture and its corresponding written name. The picture is analyzed in terms of its degree of univocity (i.e., picture naming agreement). The picture name is analyzed separately in three forms: visual written word, auditory spoken word, and visual spoken word (i.e., speechreading). Visual written word is made of graphemes. It is analyzed in terms of its degree of both: familiarity or recognizability (i.e., the degree to which it is suitable to be read via lexical reading route) and decodibility (i.e., the degree to which it is suitable to be read via perilexical reading route). Auditory spoken word is made of phonemes. It is analyzed in terms of its degree of encodibility (i.e., the degree to which it may be suitable for writing or spelling via perilexical spelling route). Visual spoken word is made of visemes. It is analyzed in terms of its degree of: speechreadability (i.e., the degree to which it may be understood via visual speechreading), audibilizability (i.e., the degree to which the auditory imagery of phonemes can be evoked by mouthshapes or visemes during speechreading), and encodibility (i.e., the degree to which it is suitable to be written or spelled correctly via perilexical route). The sourcebook is made of 971 lexical entries. Each entry is made of a picture (on the left) and several data pertaining to its corresponding name (on the right). The right side of the entry is made of six areas. The first area provides the picture name as it is written in both alphabets: the Roman alphabet (orthographic form) and the International Phonetic Alphabet. It also provides the semantic category to which the word belongs. The second area provides the picture number (for indexing all the 971 pictures of the sourcebook). The third area provides the picture univocity in a 0-100 scale for children aged: 2 years, 3 years, 4 years, 5 years, 6 years, 7 to 10 years, as well as for adults. The fourth area provides the visual written word as it is analyzed in terms of its degree of familiarity or recognizability (i.e., the degree to which the written word is suitable to be read via lexical reading route) in a 1-9 point scale, for children from 5th grade, 4th grade, 3rd grade, 2nd grade, and 1st grade. In such a scale, 5 corresponds to the mean, 6 is the mean plus 1 standard error, 7 is the mean plus 2 standard errors and so forth until 9, whereas 4 corresponds to the mean minus 1 standard error, 3 corresponds to the mean minus 2 standard errors and so forth until 1, which corresponds to the mean minus 4 standar erros. The fifth area is made of four lines. Each line is divided into four columns. The first line provides the visual written word degree of decodibility (i.e., the degree to which it is suitable to be read via perilexical reading route) in a 0-1 scale. The second line provides the auditory spoken word degree of encodibility (i.e., the degree to which it may be suitable for writing or spelling via perilexical spelling route) in a 0-1 scale. The third line provides the visual spoken word degree of audibilizability (i.e., the degree to which the auditory imagery of phonemes can be evoked by mouthshapes or visemes during speechreading) in a 0-1 scale. The fouth line provides the visual spoken word degree of encodibility (i.e., the degree to which it is suitable to be written or spelled correctly via perilexical route) in a 0-1 scale. Each line is divided into four columns. Each column presents the data pertaining to the line in question in 1 of 4 different forms. In the first and second columns the data consist of the mean of the ratios regardless of incidence. In the third and fourth columns the data consist of the mean of the ratios weighted by differencial incidence. In the first and third columns the data consist of the mean of the ratios regardless of tonicity of speech (either auditory or visual) in pronunciation. In the second and fourth columns the data consist of the mean of the ratios weighted by differencial tonicity of speech (either auditory or visual) in pronunciation. For instance the first line provides the visual written word degree of decodibility (i.e., grapheme to phoneme decoding). In the first column decodibility is calculated as a mere mean of the ratios regardless of either incidence or tonicity. In the second column decodibility is calculated as a mean of the ratios regardless of incidence but weighted in terms of tonicity. In the third column decodibility is calculated as a mean of the ratios weighted in terms of incidence but regardless of tonicity. In the fourth column it is calculated as a mean of the ratios weighted in terms of both incidence and tonicity. The sixth area provides the visual spoken word degree of speechreadability (i.e., the degree to which it may be understood via visual speechreading) in a 0-1 scale. The speechreadability is presented in 1 of 4 different forms. In the first and second columns, the speechreadability is calculated according to Doria\'s model. In the third and fourth columns it is calculated according to a phonetic model. In the first column and third columns it is calculated regardless of tonicity in pronunciation. In the second and fourth columns it is calculated in a way that is weighted by the differencial tonicity in pronunciation

No description available.

Esta dissertação de mestrado apresenta um banco de figuras e palavras. O banco objetiva servir para a aumentar a validade e precisão dos instrumentos de avaliação, bem como a eficácia dos materiais instrucionais para desenvolvimento de linguagem. Este banco contém 971 entradas lexicais. Cada entrada contém uma figura e seu correspondente nome escrito. A figura é analisada em termos de grau de univocidade (grau de concordância na nomeação). O nome da figura é analisado separadamente em três formas: palavra escrita visível, palavra falada audível, e palavra falada visível (lida orofacialmente). Palavras escritas visíveis são compostas de grafemas. São analisadas em termos de seu grau de familiaridade e reconhecibilidade (grau em que pode ser lida via rota lexical) e decodificabilidade (grau em que pode ser lida pela rota perilexical ou fonológica). Palavras ouvidas audíveis são compostas de fonemas. São analisadas em termos do grau de cifrabilidade (grau de facilidade com que podem ser escritas via rota perilexical). Palavras faladas vistas são compostas de fanerolaliemas. São analisadas em termos do grau de legibilidade orofacial (grau em que podem ser compreendidas apenas pela visão), audibilizabilidade (grau em que a imagem auditiva dos fonemas pode ser evocada por fanerolaliemas durante a leitura orofacial visual), e cifrabilidade (grau de facilidade com que podem ser escritas via rota perilexical). O banco é composto de 971 entradas lexicais, cada qual composta de uma figura (à esquerda) e de vários dados pertinentes ao seu nome correspondente (à direita). O lado direito da entrada é composto de seis campos. O Campo 1 fornece o o nome da figura escrito em dois alfabetos: alfabeto romano e alfabeto fonético internacional. Ele também fornece a categoria semântica à qual pertence a palavra. O Campo 2 fornece o número da figura (para indexar todas as 971 figuras do banco). O Campo 3 fornece a univocidade da figura numa escala de 0-100 pontos separadamente para crianças de 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 7-10 anos de idade, bem como para adultos. O Campo 4 fornece a palavra escrita visível tal como analisada em termos de seu grau de familiaridade ou reconhecibilidade (grau em que pode ser lida via rota lexical) numa escala de 1-9 pontos, separadamente para crianças de 5º ano, 4º ano, 3º ano, 2º ano, e 1º ano. Nessa escala, 5 corresponde à média, 6 a 1 erro-padrão (EP) acima da média, 7 a 2 EP acima da média e assim por diante até 9; ao passo que 4 corresponde 1 EP abaixo da média, 3 a 2 EP abaixo da média, e assim por diante até 1. O Campo 5 é composto de quatro linhas, cada qual dividida em quatro colunas. A Linha 1 fornece o grau de decifrabilidade (grau com que pode ser lida pela rota perilexical) da palavra escrita visível, numa escala de 0-1. A Linha 2 fornece o grau de cifrabilidade da palavra ouvida (grau com que pode ser escrita pela rota perilexical), numa escala de 0-1. A Linha 3 fornece o grau de audibilizabilidade da palavra falada lida orofacialmente (grau com que sequência de fanerolaliemas pode ser convertida em sequência de fonemas), numa escala de 0-1. A Linha 3 fornece o grau de cifrabilidade da palavra falada lida orofacialmente (grau com que sequência de fanerolaliemas pode ser convertida em sequência de grafemas), numa escala de 0-1. Cada palavra é dividida em suas colunas. cada coluna fornece os dados referentes à linha em questão em uma de quatro formas diferentes. Nas Colunas 1 e 2, dados consistem na média das razões independente da incidência. Nas Colunas 3 e 4, dados consistem na média das razões ponderada por incidência diferencial. Nas Colunas 1 e 3 os dados consistem na média das razões independentemente da tonicidade da fala (seja ouvida ou vista) na pronúncia. Nas Colunas 2 e 4, os dados consistem na média das razões ponderada pela tonicidade diferencial da fala (seja ouvida ou vista) na pronúncia. Por exemplo, a Linha 1 fornece o grau de decifrabilidade grafema-fonema da palavra escrita visível. Na Coluna 1 decoficabilidade é calculada como mera média de razões independente da incidência ou tonicidade. Na Coluna 2 decodificabilidade é calculada como média das razões independente da incidência mas ponderasa pela tonicidade. Na Coluna 3 decodificabilidade é calculada como média de razões ponderadas em termos de incidência mas independente de tonicidade. Na Coluna 4 decodificabilidade é calculada como média de razões ponderadas em termos de incidência e de tonicidade. O Campo 6 fornece o grau de legibilidade orofacial da fala vista, numa escala de 0-1. O grau de legibilidade orofacial é apresentado em quatro formas. Nas Colunas 1 e 2 ela se encontra calculada segundo o modelo Dória; nas Colunas 3 e 4 ela se encontra calculada segundo o modelo Fonético-Articulatório. Nas Colunas 1 e 3 ela é calculada independentemente da tonicidade da pronúncia; nas Colunas 2 e 4 ela é calculada de modo ponderado pela tonicidade diferencial da pronúncia / This master\'s thesis presents a new sourcebook aimed at increasing the validity and precision of language assessment tools, as well as the efficacy of instructional materials for language development. The sourcebook contains 971 lexical entries. Each entry contains a picture and its corresponding written name. The picture is analyzed in terms of its degree of univocity (i.e., picture naming agreement). The picture name is analyzed separately in three forms: visual written word, auditory spoken word, and visual spoken word (i.e., speechreading). Visual written word is made of graphemes. It is analyzed in terms of its degree of both: familiarity or recognizability (i.e., the degree to which it is suitable to be read via lexical reading route) and decodibility (i.e., the degree to which it is suitable to be read via perilexical reading route). Auditory spoken word is made of phonemes. It is analyzed in terms of its degree of encodibility (i.e., the degree to which it may be suitable for writing or spelling via perilexical spelling route). Visual spoken word is made of visemes. It is analyzed in terms of its degree of: speechreadability (i.e., the degree to which it may be understood via visual speechreading), audibilizability (i.e., the degree to which the auditory imagery of phonemes can be evoked by mouthshapes or visemes during speechreading), and encodibility (i.e., the degree to which it is suitable to be written or spelled correctly via perilexical route). The sourcebook is made of 971 lexical entries. Each entry is made of a picture (on the left) and several data pertaining to its corresponding name (on the right). The right side of the entry is made of six areas. The first area provides the picture name as it is written in both alphabets: the Roman alphabet (orthographic form) and the International Phonetic Alphabet. It also provides the semantic category to which the word belongs. The second area provides the picture number (for indexing all the 971 pictures of the sourcebook). The third area provides the picture univocity in a 0-100 scale for children aged: 2 years, 3 years, 4 years, 5 years, 6 years, 7 to 10 years, as well as for adults. The fourth area provides the visual written word as it is analyzed in terms of its degree of familiarity or recognizability (i.e., the degree to which the written word is suitable to be read via lexical reading route) in a 1-9 point scale, for children from 5th grade, 4th grade, 3rd grade, 2nd grade, and 1st grade. In such a scale, 5 corresponds to the mean, 6 is the mean plus 1 standard error, 7 is the mean plus 2 standard errors and so forth until 9, whereas 4 corresponds to the mean minus 1 standard error, 3 corresponds to the mean minus 2 standard errors and so forth until 1, which corresponds to the mean minus 4 standar erros. The fifth area is made of four lines. Each line is divided into four columns. The first line provides the visual written word degree of decodibility (i.e., the degree to which it is suitable to be read via perilexical reading route) in a 0-1 scale. The second line provides the auditory spoken word degree of encodibility (i.e., the degree to which it may be suitable for writing or spelling via perilexical spelling route) in a 0-1 scale. The third line provides the visual spoken word degree of audibilizability (i.e., the degree to which the auditory imagery of phonemes can be evoked by mouthshapes or visemes during speechreading) in a 0-1 scale. The fouth line provides the visual spoken word degree of encodibility (i.e., the degree to which it is suitable to be written or spelled correctly via perilexical route) in a 0-1 scale. Each line is divided into four columns. Each column presents the data pertaining to the line in question in 1 of 4 different forms. In the first and second columns the data consist of the mean of the ratios regardless of incidence. In the third and fourth columns the data consist of the mean of the ratios weighted by differencial incidence. In the first and third columns the data consist of the mean of the ratios regardless of tonicity of speech (either auditory or visual) in pronunciation. In the second and fourth columns the data consist of the mean of the ratios weighted by differencial tonicity of speech (either auditory or visual) in pronunciation. For instance the first line provides the visual written word degree of decodibility (i.e., grapheme to phoneme decoding). In the first column decodibility is calculated as a mere mean of the ratios regardless of either incidence or tonicity. In the second column decodibility is calculated as a mean of the ratios regardless of incidence but weighted in terms of tonicity. In the third column decodibility is calculated as a mean of the ratios weighted in terms of incidence but regardless of tonicity. In the fourth column it is calculated as a mean of the ratios weighted in terms of both incidence and tonicity. The sixth area provides the visual spoken word degree of speechreadability (i.e., the degree to which it may be understood via visual speechreading) in a 0-1 scale. The speechreadability is presented in 1 of 4 different forms. In the first and second columns, the speechreadability is calculated according to Doria\'s model. In the third and fourth columns it is calculated according to a phonetic model. In the first column and third columns it is calculated regardless of tonicity in pronunciation. In the second and fourth columns it is calculated in a way that is weighted by the differencial tonicity in pronunciation

No description available.

Abstract
  Title:Systembolaget och unga - En studie om hur Systembolagets reklamfilmers budskap tas emot  Authors: Frida Johnsson, Evelina Josefsson, Minda Landgren  Aim: The aim with this essay is to analyze how the target audience 18-19-year olds, and consumers of Systembolaget, the target audience of 20- 25-year olds, are affected by two specific commercials named “Systrar” and “Bröder” and furthermore examine whether the commercials have a deterrent effect on the audience or not. The questions the essay answers are “How do 18-19-year olds perceive that they are affected by the campaign films?” and “How do 20-25-year olds perceive that they are affected by the campaign films?”. This essay uses the methods qualitative analysis and focus group interviewand is based on the theoryEncoding/Decoding. In conclusion Systembolaget uses emotions to convey their message. To the audiences the commercials are not as deterrent as one might first imagine.   Number of pages: 56 Course: Media and Communication studies C Department: Department of Informatics and Media University: Uppsala University Period: Autumn 2018 Tutor: Per Gunnar Holmlöv Keywords: Ungdomar, Systembolaget, Alkohol, Reklamfilm, Encoding/Decoding, Teman, Koder, Kontext