Thesis (D.M.A.)--University of North Texas, 2007. / System requirements: Adobe Acrobat Reader. Accompanied by 4 recitals, recorded Nov. 3, 2003, Apr. 5, 2004, Apr. 18, 2005, and June 8, 2007. Includes bibliographical references (p. 46-48).

The nuclear matrix (NM) is proposed to be a permanent network of core filaments underlying thicker fibres, present regardless of transcriptional activity. It is found to be both RNA and protein rich; indeed, numerous important nuclear proteins are components of the structure. In addition to mediating the organisation of entire chromosomes, the NM has also been demonstrated to tether telomeres via their TTAGGG repeats. In order to examine telomeric interactions with the NM, a technique known as the DNA halo preparation has been employed. Regions of DNA that are tightly attached to the structure are found within a so-called residual nucleus, while those sequences forming lesser associations produce a halo of DNA. Coupled with various FISH methodologies, this technique allowed the anchorage of genomic regions by the NM, to be analysed. In normal fibroblasts, the majority of chromosomes and telomeres were extensively anchored to the NM. Such interactions did not vary significantly in proliferating and senescent nuclei. However, a decrease in NM-associated telomeres was detected in quiescence. Since lamin A is an integral component of the NM, it seemed pertinent to examine chromosome and telomere NM-anchorage in Hutchinson-Gilford Progeria Syndrome (HGPS) fibroblasts, which contain mutant forms of lamin A. Indeed, genome tethering by the NM was perturbed in HGPS. In immortalised HGPS fibroblasts, this disrupted anchorage appeared to be rescued; the implications of this finding will be discussed. This study also suggested that telomere-NM interactions are aberrant in X-linked Emery-Dreifuss Muscular Dystrophy (X-EDMD), which is caused by mutant forms of emerin, another NM-associated protein. The positioning of selected genes in control and X-EDMD cell lines was examined in un-extracted nuclei using 2D and 3D FISH. Subtle shifts in the organisation of these genes were detected in diseased cells; however, their expression levels remained unaltered. Furthermore, in order to examine the architectural integrity of the nuclear lamina in lamin A and emerin mutant cell lines, scanning electron microscopy (SEM) was employed. This work revealed that such structures were indeed compromised in disease. The findings presented in this thesis highlight the importance of lamin A and emerin in mediating the organisation of the genome and taken together, promote the hypothesis that dysfunctional NM dynamics may well contribute to disease pathology.

Thesis (M.A.)--University of Hong Kong, 1999. / Includes bibliographical references.

Thesis (M.A.)--University of Hong Kong, 1999. / Includes bibliographical references. Also available in print.

Terence Hutchison's 1938 essay has been variously interpreted as introducing positivism, ultra-empiricism, and Popperian falsificationism into economics. Given Popper's well known anti-positivist stance, this state of affairs may seem puzzling. It might be presumed either that contradictions of some kind are involved in Hutchison's position, or that Popper's stance is not so far removed from logical positivism after all. In tins thesis the latter option is adopted and Popper and logical positivism is viewed as part of a wider 'logical reconstructionist' pre-Quinean philosophy of science. Yet this move may not, and should not, resolve all disquietude on the part of the reader. For, to the extent that Hutchison adopted those aspects of Popper which clashed with logical positivism, there is an inherent contradiction between the view that Hutchison introduced positivism and the view that he introduced Popper into economics. This provides us with the springboard we need for our thesis. For the contradiction is resolved once these views are recognised as turning Hutchison into a straw man. In the weak version of our thesis we argue that there has been an overemphasis on the positivist and Popperian elements in Hutchison's essay and a neglect of the extent to which it is concerned with economic methodology. In the strong version of our thesis we argue that Hutchison's essay is best viewed as a modern restatement of the inductivist-empirical-historical, as opposed to the deductivist-apriorist-fonnalist, approach in the long-standing methodenstreit in economics. In this restatement Hutchison draws on various elements of positivism and Popper to support a position that arises out of, and is specific to, the concerns of economic methodology, rather than to promote any particular philosophy of science in economics. Survey chapters on the philosophy of science with special emphasis on logical positivism, and on aspects of the history of economic methodology, enable us to evaluate the nature of Hutchison's essay and to substantiate our thesis. Thereafter we highlight the shortcomings of the traditional interpretations of Hutchison's essay pointing to how these have limited Hutchison's influence in economics. / Economics / D. Litt. et Phil. (Economics)

Terence Hutchison's 193 8 essay has been variously interpreted as introducing positivism, ultra-empiricism, and Popperian falsificationism into economics. Given Popper's well known anti-positivist stance, this state of affairs may seem puzzling. It might be presumed either that contradictions of some kind are involved in Hutchison's position, or that Popper's stance is not so far removed from logical positivism after all. In this thesis the latter option is adopted and Popper and logical positivism is viewed as part of a wider 'logical reconstructionist' pre-Quinean philosophy of science. Yet this move may not, and should not, resolve all disquietude on the part of the reader. For, to the extent that Hutchison adopted those aspects of Popper which clashed with logical positivism, there is an inherent contradiction between the view that Hutchison introduced positivism and the view that he introduced Popper into economics. This provides us with the springboard we need for our thesis. For the contradiction is resolved once these views are recognised as turning Hutchison into a straw man. In the weak version of our thesis we argue that there has been· an overemphasis on the positivist and Popperian elements in Hutchison's essay and a neglect of the extent to which it is concerned with economic methodology. In the strong version of our thesis we argue that Hutchison's essay is best viewed as a modem restatement of the inductivist-empirical-historical, as opposed to the deductivist-apriorist-formalist, approach in the long-standing methodenstreit in economics. In this restatement Hutchison draws on various elements of positivism and Popper to support a position that arises out of, and is specific to, the concerns of economic methodology, rather than to promote any particular philosophy of science in economics. Survey chapters on the philosophy of science with special emphasis on logical positivism, and on aspects of the history of economic methodology, enable us to evaluate the nature of Hutchison's essay and to substantiate our thesis. Thereafter we highlight the shortcomings of the traditional interpretations of Hutchison's essay pointing to how these have limited Hutchison's influence in economics. / Economics and Management Sciences / D. Litt. et Phil. (Economics)

Terence Hutchison's 1938 essay has been variously interpreted as introducing positivism, ultra-empiricism, and Popperian falsificationism into economics. Given Popper's well known anti-positivist stance, this state of affairs may seem puzzling. It might be presumed either that contradictions of some kind are involved in Hutchison's position, or that Popper's stance is not so far removed from logical positivism after all. In tins thesis the latter option is adopted and Popper and logical positivism is viewed as part of a wider 'logical reconstructionist' pre-Quinean philosophy of science. Yet this move may not, and should not, resolve all disquietude on the part of the reader. For, to the extent that Hutchison adopted those aspects of Popper which clashed with logical positivism, there is an inherent contradiction between the view that Hutchison introduced positivism and the view that he introduced Popper into economics. This provides us with the springboard we need for our thesis. For the contradiction is resolved once these views are recognised as turning Hutchison into a straw man. In the weak version of our thesis we argue that there has been an overemphasis on the positivist and Popperian elements in Hutchison's essay and a neglect of the extent to which it is concerned with economic methodology. In the strong version of our thesis we argue that Hutchison's essay is best viewed as a modern restatement of the inductivist-empirical-historical, as opposed to the deductivist-apriorist-fonnalist, approach in the long-standing methodenstreit in economics. In this restatement Hutchison draws on various elements of positivism and Popper to support a position that arises out of, and is specific to, the concerns of economic methodology, rather than to promote any particular philosophy of science in economics. Survey chapters on the philosophy of science with special emphasis on logical positivism, and on aspects of the history of economic methodology, enable us to evaluate the nature of Hutchison's essay and to substantiate our thesis. Thereafter we highlight the shortcomings of the traditional interpretations of Hutchison's essay pointing to how these have limited Hutchison's influence in economics. / Economics / D. Litt. et Phil. (Economics)

Terence Hutchison's 193 8 essay has been variously interpreted as introducing positivism, ultra-empiricism, and Popperian falsificationism into economics. Given Popper's well known anti-positivist stance, this state of affairs may seem puzzling. It might be presumed either that contradictions of some kind are involved in Hutchison's position, or that Popper's stance is not so far removed from logical positivism after all. In this thesis the latter option is adopted and Popper and logical positivism is viewed as part of a wider 'logical reconstructionist' pre-Quinean philosophy of science. Yet this move may not, and should not, resolve all disquietude on the part of the reader. For, to the extent that Hutchison adopted those aspects of Popper which clashed with logical positivism, there is an inherent contradiction between the view that Hutchison introduced positivism and the view that he introduced Popper into economics. This provides us with the springboard we need for our thesis. For the contradiction is resolved once these views are recognised as turning Hutchison into a straw man. In the weak version of our thesis we argue that there has been· an overemphasis on the positivist and Popperian elements in Hutchison's essay and a neglect of the extent to which it is concerned with economic methodology. In the strong version of our thesis we argue that Hutchison's essay is best viewed as a modem restatement of the inductivist-empirical-historical, as opposed to the deductivist-apriorist-formalist, approach in the long-standing methodenstreit in economics. In this restatement Hutchison draws on various elements of positivism and Popper to support a position that arises out of, and is specific to, the concerns of economic methodology, rather than to promote any particular philosophy of science in economics. Survey chapters on the philosophy of science with special emphasis on logical positivism, and on aspects of the history of economic methodology, enable us to evaluate the nature of Hutchison's essay and to substantiate our thesis. Thereafter we highlight the shortcomings of the traditional interpretations of Hutchison's essay pointing to how these have limited Hutchison's influence in economics. / Economics and Management Sciences / D. Litt. et Phil. (Economics)

Euphonium concertos and similar masterworks for euphonium have been recorded, written about, analyzed, and discussed at length numerous times in recent years. Unfortunately, the most frequently studied and performed euphonium solos have been almost completely ignored in this regard. These works are useful for performance by the undergraduate-level euphonium player. Solos in this category are played by strong high school players and undergraduate euphonium students all over the world. These solos receive countless performances and play a crucial role in the development of young euphonium players, yet have never received attention in the form of a published pedagogical guide. The pieces of greater difficulty and substantial length have received more attention for obvious reasons, but solo pieces most useful for the developing euphoniumist need to be analyzed and discussed on a pedagogical level. This paper is a pedagogical guide to commonly played euphonium solos by the undergraduate level student. The three pieces used in this study are Sonatina by Warner Hutchison, Sonata for Unaccompanied Euphonium by Fred Clinard, and Lyric Suite by Donald White. Pertinent background information about each piece is presented in order for the reader to understand the historical context in which it was written. A list of relevant information and minimum performance skills (instrumentation, length, range, articulation skills, etc.) are included for each selection. An analysis of particular sections of each piece are presented for the reader to adequately grasp concepts and practice ideas that are explained, although the bulk of analysis is of a pedagogical nature. The main body of the paper focuses on assisting the reader with ways to approach this solo literature in daily practice as well as effective performance ideas. Particularly troublesome areas of each piece are identified and strategies to overcome common pitfalls and performance errors are noted.

The discursive and critical positions of the ‘classic’ nineteenth-century novel, particularly the woman’s novel, in the field of adaptation studies have been dominated by long-standing concerns about textual fidelity and the generic processes of the text-screen transfer. The sociocultural patterns of adaptation criticism have also been largely ensconced in representations of literary women on screen. Taking a decisive twist from tradition, this thesis traces the evolution of representations of masculinity in the malleable characters of Rochester and Heathcliff in film and television adaptations of Charlotte Brontë’s Jane Eyre and Emily Brontë’s Wuthering Heights between 1939 and 2009. Concepts of masculinity have been a neglected area of enquiry in studies of the ‘classic’ novel on screen. Adaptations of the Brontës’ novels, as well as the adapted novels of other ‘classic’ women authors such as Jane Austen, George Eliot and Elizabeth Gaskell, increasingly foreground male character in traditionally female-oriented narratives or narratives whose primary protagonist is female. This thesis brings together industrial histories, textual frames and sociocultural influences that form the wider contexts of the adaptations to demonstrate how male characterisation and different representations of masculinity are reformulated and foregrounded through three different adaptive histories of the narratives of Jane Eyre and Wuthering Heights. Through the contours of the film and television industries, the application of text and context analysis, and wider sociocultural considerations of each period an understanding of how Rochester and Heathcliff have been transmuted and centralised within the adaptive history of the Brontë novel.