Die Arbeit untersucht Differenzdiskurse zu zwei historischen sozialen Identitäten im Manden (Westafrika) anhand mündlich und schriftlich tradierter Texte unterschiedlicher Sprachen (Bambara, Französisch, Deutsch, Englisch) und Genres (Reisebericht, Preislied (fasa), Epos (maana), Roman, Märchen (nsiirin), Lied (donkili)), die zwischen dem 14. bis 21. Jahrhundert erschienen sind. Die Differenz von horon, dem Edlen, Freien und jeli, dem 'Handhaber des Wortes' wird dabei höchst unterschiedlich als komplexer Beziehungsmodus diskursiv und performativ hervorgebracht und gestaltet. Als uneigentliche Differenz bildet sie sich unter der Prämisse des Schamprinzips vor allem entlang der jeweils vorgenommenen Zuschreibungen von freigiebigem Renommee-Suchenden und erbittendem Panegyriker. Die analysierten Texte, die den Zeitraum von Beginn des mittelalterlichen Mali-Reiches bis Mitte des 20. Jahrhunderts als intradiegetisches Setting haben, verhandeln die Differenz entsprechend spezifischer Wirkungsintentionen von einer Außenseiter-Perspektive, z.T. zur Legitimation kolonialer Absichten oder von einer Insider-Perspektive aus, um, teils politisch motiviert, das eigene kulturelle Erbe zu valorisieren oder auch um (historische) Mißstände anzuprangern. Dabei wird die Differenz von jeli und hↄrↄn unterschiedlich ausgestaltet, mit dem horon als Helden (ŋana, cεfarin), König (mansa, faama), Gastgeber (jatigi) und dem jeli als Meisterredner/sänger (ŋaara), Reputations-Verantwortlichen, Klienten des jatigi. Literatur wie Differenz wird als rhetorischer Ort kreativer Verhandlungen, strategischer (Neu)schöpfungen betrachtet, durch welche die jeweiligen Akteure spezifische Interessen verfolgen und damit variabel an Diskursen und damit an Wirklichkeiten mitgestalten. Jeli und horon verändern sich als literarische Konstruktion in Abhängigkeit von ästhetischen und ideologischen Strategien. / The present work examines discourses of difference about two historical social identities in Manden (West Africa) using oral and written literary texts of different languages (Bambara, French, German, English) and genres (travelogue, praise song (fasa), epic (maana), novel, fairy tale, song (dↄnkili)), published between the 14th to the 21st century. The difference between horon, the noble, the free, and jeli, the 'handler of the word', is produced and shaped in a highly differentiated way as a complex mode of relation(ship) in a discursive and performative manner. As an improper difference it is formed under the premise of the principle of shame, especially along the attributions made between the generous rewards seeker and the panegyrical requester. The analysed texts, which have the period from the beginning of the medieval Mali empire to the middle of the 20th century as an intradiegetic setting, negotiate the difference according to specific intended effects from an outsider perspective, eg. for purposes of legitimacy of colonial intentions or from an insider perspective, partly politically motivated, in order to valorise one's own cultural heritage or to denounce (historical) grievances. The difference between jeli and hↄrↄn appears in varying ways, with the horon as hero (ŋana, cεfarin), king (mansa, faama), host (jatigi) and the jeli as master-singer/-orator (ŋaara), reputational entrepreneur, client of a jatigi. Literature and Difference are considered both as a rhetorical place of creative negotiation, of strategic (re)creation, through which the respective actors pursue specific interests and thereby participate in shaping discourses and thus realities. The jeli, who is at the same time performer, narrator and protagonist of many narratives, and the horon, determined by his status and his ethos, change as a literary construction depending on aesthetic and ideological strategies.

Tbis study has as primary objective the development of an appropriate model to assist ' teachers, in South Africa, to be able to understand and assist learners with behaviour problems. The need for the study has its genesis within the current difficulties teachers experience in dealing with behaviour problems in the classroom and the fact that increasing numbers of children are involved. A key facet of the research is its accent on the unmet emotional needs of learners that function as a behavioural determinant. The study is analytical descriptive in nature and as such is based on two fundamental dimensions:- to acquire a sound theoretical understanding of the concepts, causative 'factors and underlying behaviour problems and the most appropriate means to deal therewith and substantiating the insights acquired by means of interviews with teachers, school principals, and other significant role players. An earnest attempt was made to analyse behaviour problems in terms of the various theoretical frameworks presented within contemporary literature. The ecological systems model was found to be the most appropriate for the development of the . referenced model. This stands in sharp contrast to the traditional medical model which in many instances still forms the basis of current theory and practice. Learners with emotional problems experience behaviour problems which serve as barriers to effective learning. Little attention however, has been attributed to putting appropriate systems in place to assist these learners. A key consideration embodied within the new Education Policy (NCS DOCUMENT 1997:1 0) is the issue of meeting the needs of all learners so that they are able to actualise their potential - this includes their emotional needs. The findings of this study need to be seen within the light of meeting this objective. In order to address the unmet emotional needs of learner, teachers must attend to the cognitive mind maps which embody internalized feelings and cognition. A model for understanding the cognitive maps has been developed as part of this study and serves as introduction to the model developed to assist learners wi~h behaviour problems. The study provides a new perspective directed at understanding instead of managing behaviour problems. / Educational Studies / D. Ed. (Special Needs Education)

The global context of decision making continues to adapt in response to international threats. Political psychologists have therefore considered decision making processes regarding major uses of force a key area of interest. Although presidential personality has been widely studied as a mitigating factor in the decision making patterns leading to uses of force, traditional theories have not accounted for the emotions of individuals as they affect political actions and are used to frame public perception of the use of force. This thesis therefore measures expressed emotion and cognitive expressions in the form of expressed aggression, passivity, blame, praise, certainty, realism, and optimism as a means of predicting subsequent major uses of force. Since aggression and blame are precipitated by anger and perceived vulnerability, they are theorized to foreshadow increased uses of force (Gardner and Moore 2008). Conversely, passivity and praise are indicative of empathy and joy respectively, and are not expected to precede aggressive behavior conducted to maintain emotional regulation (Roberton, Daffer, and Bucks 2012). Additionally, the three cognitive variables of interest expand on existing literature on beliefs and decision making expounded by such authors as Walker (2010), Winter (2003) and Hermann (2003). DICTION 6.0 is used to analyze all text data of presidential news conferences, candidate debates, and State of the Union speeches given between 1945 and 2000 stored by The American Presidency Project (Hart and Carroll 2012). Howell and Pevehouse's (2005) quantitative assessment of quarterly U.S. uses of force between 1945 and 2000 is employed as a means of quantifying instances of major uses of force. Results show systematic differences among the traits expressed by presidents, with most expressions staying consistent across spontaneous speech contexts. Additionally, State of the Union speeches consistently yielded the highest scores across the expressed traits measured; supporting the theory that prepared speech is used to emotionally frame situations and setup emotional interpretations of events to present to the public. Time sensitive regression analyses indicate that expressed aggression within the context of State of the Union Addresses is the only significant predictor of major uses of force by the administration. That being said, other studies may use the comparative findings presented herein to further establish a robust model of personality that accounts for individual dispositions toward emotional expression as a means of framing the emotional interpretation of events by audiences.

The thesis, entitled “From Self-Praise to Self-Boasting: Paul’s Unmasking of the Conflicting Rhetorico-Linguistic Phenomena in 1 Corinthians,” examines the rhetorical conventions of “boasting” and self-praise among those vying for social status and honor within the Greco-Roman world. While the terminological options for “boasting” and self-praise frequently overlap, a survey of these conventions demonstrates that the ancients possessed a categorical distinction between “boasting” and self-praise, which oftentimes conflicted with Paul’s distinction. Clear examples of this conflict appear in 1 Cor 1:10-4:21; 5:1-13; 9:1-27; 13:1-13; and 15:30-32, where Paul addresses the Corinthians’ overestimation of wisdom and eloquence, redirects the Corinthians’ attention away from loyalties to specific leaders to loyalty to Christ, redefines the standards by which the Corinthians should view themselves and their leaders, counters the Corinthians’ tendency to engage in anthropocentric “boasting,” and affirms his own apostolic ministry. It is the Corinthian community’s inability to grasp the application of theocentric “boasting” which leads Paul to address certain aspects and values of secular Corinth that have penetrated the Corinthian community. Thus, operating from an eschatological perspective, Paul critiques both the Corinthians’ attitudes and the Greco-Roman cultural values upon which their attitudes are based. Through irony, self-presentation, imitation, differentiating between theocentric and anthropocentric “boasting,” and distinguishing between personality and gospel rhetoric, Paul challenges the secular notions of social status, power, wisdom, leadership, and patronage and exhorts the Corinthians to focus their attention on their relationship with the Lord rather than on improving their social status or on increasing their honor.