In the light of a more punitive stance in Corrections and public discontent with the criminal justice system, a number of studies have been conducted since 1970 testing public punitiveness, probably in an attempt to determine whether sentences laid down by courts are in line with public perceptions on just deserts. This study combines two scales: The first a Likert scale measuring punitiveness as such and the second a "Just Deserts" scale testing public reactions in terms of imprisonment for crime descriptions. By using Pearson's correlation, no positive correlation could be established between these two scales. Profiles of the top and bottom 15% scorers on both scales showed that the scales were, if anything, negatively related. This information is informative in the sense that opinion polls showing public discontentment with sentencing cannot be seen as a true reflection of their reactions to more descriptive cases. / Penology / M.A. (Penology)

In this dissertation the problems surrounding the sentencing stage and factors which influence the sentence are briefly considered. The emphasis is on the use and value of a pre-sentence report in determining suitable sentences other than imprisonment. Historical background in the use of pre-sentence reports in South Africa, England and America is briefly referred to. Relevant concepts, such as individualisation of punishment, are considered in relation to possible sentences such as compensation, fines, community service, and correctional supervision. It is concluded that the provisions of sections 274 and 276A of the Criminal Procedure Act 51 of 1 977 are not enough to regulate the use of pre-sentence reports in South Africa. It is further concluded that legislation is needed in this area, but in the meantime, our courts should work towards developing guidelines based on the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Act 51 of 1 977. / Criminal and Procedural Law / LL.M (Law)

Oração sem sujeito é toda e qualquer oração destituída de SN sujeito, exceto nos casos em que tal SN encontra-se em elipse. Sua manifestação na língua pode se dar tanto em termos pessoais quanto impessoais. Estas incluem ocorrências essenciais, aqui chamadas de fenomenológicas e acidentais, denominadas impessoalizadas. Já aquelas se apresentam nos casos de indeterminação de agente por omissão do SN sujeito, tradicionalmente alcunhados casos de sujeito indeterminado e por meio do processo de ergativização em sua versão secundária, aquele que atua sobre verbos não causativos e tem sido porta de entrada à concretização de orações destituídas de SN sujeito no português brasileiro. Objetivamos neste trabalho a descrição de todas as estruturas apontadas, em termos de seus comportamentos morfossintáticos na língua, pois compreendemos que descrever a oração sem sujeito portuguesa é identificar contextos morfossintáticos de dispensa, em distintos graus, do SN sujeito. Para tanto, valemo-nos de um enfoque prototípico da língua, através do qual dialogamos com a natureza escalar de nosso objeto de estudo / Subject-absent sentences are all and every sentence devoid of subject Nominal Phrase (NP), except in cases when NP is in ellipse. They occur in the language on personal or impersonal terms. On impersonal terms, they include essential occurrences, here called phenomenological occurrences and accidental occurrences, here called a-personalized occurrences. While on personal terms, they appear in cases of indetermination of the agent by ommission of subject NP, also known as indeterminate subject cases, and through the ergativization process in their secondary version. This kind of ergativization process acts on non-causative verbs, and has been the basis for the construction of most sentences devoid of subject NP in Brazilian Portuguese. In this thesis, we describe all structures indicated above, in terms of their morphosyntactic behavior in the language, as we argue that to describe subject-absence sentence means to identify morphosyntactic contexts for exemption of the subject NP, in different degrees. For this goal, we make use of a prototypical approach to the language, through which we engage with the gradual nature of our object of study

This thesis deals with syntactical analysis of historical text from the beginning of the eighteenth century. The title of the work is Vidění rozličné sedláčka sprostného and it was written by Valentin Bernard Jestřábský (1630 ? 1719), who was an important writer and a preacher in that time. One of the chapters is part of the appendix in this work as it was analyzed more properly than the others. The aim of our research is analysis of the structure of the compound and complex sentences in baroque texts and also the outline of the used formal means (grammatical and lexical) that the author used for expressing semantic relationships within the sentences.

O presente trabalho tratou das sentenças aditivas e das sentenças substitutivas no Direito italiano e no Direito brasileiro (mais especificamente, na jurisprudência do Supremo Tribunal Federal). Tais técnicas alternativas (ou “atípicas”) de decisão no controle de constitucionalidade foram criadas pela Corte Constitucional na Itália e, com o tempo, passaram a ser utilizadas por outros tribunais ao redor do mundo, inclusive – conforme a doutrina mencionada no trabalho – pelo Supremo Tribunal Federal no Brasil. O objetivo do trabalho foi analisar como tais modelos (ou tipos) decisórios são utilizados pela Corte Constitucional na Itália e como foram “importados” para o Brasil pela jurisprudência do Supremo Tribunal Federal. Inicialmente, estudou- se, de modo detalhado, o controle de constitucionalidade na Itália, que é exercido pela Corte Constitucional por via incidental (ou por via de exceção) ou por via principal (ou por via de ação). Em seguida, abordou-se o “arsenal” de modelos (ou tipos) decisórios da Corte Constitucional no controle de constitucionalidade, do qual fazem parte as sentenças aditivas e as sentenças substitutivas. Por fim, examinaram- se algumas decisões do Supremo Tribunal Federal que – de acordo com a doutrina mencionada no trabalho – são tidas como exemplo de sentenças aditivas e de sentenças substitutivas. Verificou-se que o Supremo Tribunal Federal não utiliza as fórmulas que, na Itália, são encontradas no dispositivo das sentenças aditivas e das sentenças substitutivas da Corte Constitucional nem admite expressamente – no dispositivo das decisões – que emprega sentenças aditivas e sentenças substitutivas, o que pode indicar que tais modelos (ou tipos) decisórios não precisam ser “importados” para o Brasil. Constatou-se, ainda, que as referências às sentenças aditivas, do modo como são feitas pelos Ministros nas decisões do Tribunal, representam grave violação à ideia de segurança jurídica, que está contida no princípio do Estado de Direito, e vulneram, pois, a própria Constituição. / The present essay adressed the additive sentences and the substitutive sentences in Italian Law and in Brazilian Law (more especifically, in the Federal Supreme Court jurisprudence). Such alternative (or “atypical”) techniques of decision in judicial review were created by the Constitucional Court in Italy and, with time, started being used by other courts around the world, including – according to the doctrine mentioned in this essay – the Federal Supreme Court in Brazil. The goal of this essay was to analise how these decision models (or types) are used by the Federal Supreme Court. Initially, the judicial review in Italy, which is exercised by the Constitutional Court by incidental via (or exceptional via) or by mainly via (or through action), was studied, in detail. Then, the “arsenal” of models (or types) of decision of the Constitutional Court in judicial review, which comprises the additive sentences and the substitutive sentences, was approached. Lastly, some decisions of the Federal Supreme Court that – according to the doctrine mentioned in this essay – are considered as example of additive sentences and of substitutive sentences were examined. It was found that the Federal Supreme Court does not use the formulas that, in Italy, are found in the device of the additive sentences and of the substitutive sentences of the Constitutional Court, nor expressly acknowledges – in the device of decisions – that employs additive sentences and substitutive sentences, which may indicate that such models (or types) of decision-making do not need to be “imported” to Brazil. It was also found that the references to the additive sentences, the way they are made by Justices in the Court’s decisions, represent a serious violation of legal certainty idea, which is contained in the Rule of Law principle, and undermines, therefore, the Constitution itself.

O presente trabalho tratou das sentenças aditivas e das sentenças substitutivas no Direito italiano e no Direito brasileiro (mais especificamente, na jurisprudência do Supremo Tribunal Federal). Tais técnicas alternativas (ou “atípicas”) de decisão no controle de constitucionalidade foram criadas pela Corte Constitucional na Itália e, com o tempo, passaram a ser utilizadas por outros tribunais ao redor do mundo, inclusive – conforme a doutrina mencionada no trabalho – pelo Supremo Tribunal Federal no Brasil. O objetivo do trabalho foi analisar como tais modelos (ou tipos) decisórios são utilizados pela Corte Constitucional na Itália e como foram “importados” para o Brasil pela jurisprudência do Supremo Tribunal Federal. Inicialmente, estudou- se, de modo detalhado, o controle de constitucionalidade na Itália, que é exercido pela Corte Constitucional por via incidental (ou por via de exceção) ou por via principal (ou por via de ação). Em seguida, abordou-se o “arsenal” de modelos (ou tipos) decisórios da Corte Constitucional no controle de constitucionalidade, do qual fazem parte as sentenças aditivas e as sentenças substitutivas. Por fim, examinaram- se algumas decisões do Supremo Tribunal Federal que – de acordo com a doutrina mencionada no trabalho – são tidas como exemplo de sentenças aditivas e de sentenças substitutivas. Verificou-se que o Supremo Tribunal Federal não utiliza as fórmulas que, na Itália, são encontradas no dispositivo das sentenças aditivas e das sentenças substitutivas da Corte Constitucional nem admite expressamente – no dispositivo das decisões – que emprega sentenças aditivas e sentenças substitutivas, o que pode indicar que tais modelos (ou tipos) decisórios não precisam ser “importados” para o Brasil. Constatou-se, ainda, que as referências às sentenças aditivas, do modo como são feitas pelos Ministros nas decisões do Tribunal, representam grave violação à ideia de segurança jurídica, que está contida no princípio do Estado de Direito, e vulneram, pois, a própria Constituição. / The present essay adressed the additive sentences and the substitutive sentences in Italian Law and in Brazilian Law (more especifically, in the Federal Supreme Court jurisprudence). Such alternative (or “atypical”) techniques of decision in judicial review were created by the Constitucional Court in Italy and, with time, started being used by other courts around the world, including – according to the doctrine mentioned in this essay – the Federal Supreme Court in Brazil. The goal of this essay was to analise how these decision models (or types) are used by the Federal Supreme Court. Initially, the judicial review in Italy, which is exercised by the Constitutional Court by incidental via (or exceptional via) or by mainly via (or through action), was studied, in detail. Then, the “arsenal” of models (or types) of decision of the Constitutional Court in judicial review, which comprises the additive sentences and the substitutive sentences, was approached. Lastly, some decisions of the Federal Supreme Court that – according to the doctrine mentioned in this essay – are considered as example of additive sentences and of substitutive sentences were examined. It was found that the Federal Supreme Court does not use the formulas that, in Italy, are found in the device of the additive sentences and of the substitutive sentences of the Constitutional Court, nor expressly acknowledges – in the device of decisions – that employs additive sentences and substitutive sentences, which may indicate that such models (or types) of decision-making do not need to be “imported” to Brazil. It was also found that the references to the additive sentences, the way they are made by Justices in the Court’s decisions, represent a serious violation of legal certainty idea, which is contained in the Rule of Law principle, and undermines, therefore, the Constitution itself.

Cette recherche s’inscrit dans le domaine du sentencing. Sa question de départ porte sur la persistance, dans les jugements correctionnels, du modèle rétributif et des peines privatives de liberté, sur le manque d’essor des peines alternatives à l’emprisonnement et sur l’allongement des peines. <p>La littérature portant sur le sentencing souligne l’importance, dans la décision de la peine, du pouvoir discrétionnaire du juge, qui fait partie intégrante du processus d’interprétation de la loi pénale. La décision est un processus humain (Hogarth), une pratique sociale complexe dans un environnement structuré et structurant (Beyens), le produit de collaborations et de contraintes institutionnelles (Gibson).<p>Adoptant la perspective de la construction de la peine comme processus humain et interactionnel en contexte, la question empirique est :« Comment le juge pénal décide-t-il de la peine dans son contexte d’action ?».<p>Son cadre conceptuel est l’ethnométhodologie. Dans ce courant, la sociologie cognitive examine la chaîne processuelle du traitement de l’information, c’est-à-dire comment les membres d’un groupe social donnent une signification à une situation en sélectionnant et interprétant les informations, puis la catégorisent et décident, par induction, de la norme à appliquer et de la conduite à tenir. <p>Pour répondre à la question empirique, le dispositif méthodologique comprend des observations durant huit mois en tant que stagiaire dans deux tribunaux ;des échanges informels avec les différents acteurs judiciaires et para-judiciaires ;et des entretiens formalisés avec les juges.<p>Quatre procédures principales se dégagent du matériau empirique :évaluer le dossier répressif ;évaluer la personne du prévenu ;évaluer la réprobation adéquate ;évaluer une peine acceptable. Ces procédures permettent de mettre en lumière les savoirs, raisons, motivations, valeurs et mécanismes qui entrent dans le processus décisionnel de la peine. <p>Cette analyse permet de construire progressivement un modèle de la prise de décision en contexte et, partant, de répondre aux questionnements de départ.<p><p><p> / Doctorat en criminologie / info:eu-repo/semantics/nonPublished

Darbe pateikiama įvairiais aspektais išnagrinėta L. S. Černiauskaitės romano Kvėpavimas į marmurą kalbinė raiška. Analizuojamas antraštės ir kūrinio bei atskirų jo dalių santykis, aptariama romano leksika, semantinės stiliaus figūros, sinonimiškai vartojamos kalbos priemonės. Dėmesys skiriamas ir romano sakinių įvairovei: aiškinamasi, kokiomis laiko formomis konstruojamas pasakojimas, kokios struktūros sakiniai dominuoja, kaip jie siejami, aptartos ir sintaksinės figūros. Romano tekstas yra ne tik prasmiškai ir formaliai siejamas, bet ir skaidomas – aptariama kompozicinė ir stilistinė teksto segmentacija. / Linguistic expression of the novel Kvėpavimas į marmurą (Breatning into Marble) by Laura Sintija Černiauskaitė analyzed from various aspects which presented in the thesis. The relation of the title and separate part of the novel are analyzed, the vocabulary, semantic stylistic devices, linguistic means used synonymously are discussed. The attention is paid also to variety of the novel sentences: the tenses constructing the narration are analyzed, the dominating sentence structures, their relation, syntactical figures are discussed. The text of the novel is related not only meaningfully and formally, but is also separated – compositional and stylistic segmentation of the text is discussed.

This thesis considers possible criteria for the selection of example sentences for difficult or unknown words in reading texts for students of German as a Second Language (GSL). The examples are intended to be provided within the context of an Intelligent Computer-Aided Language Learning (ICALL) Vocabulary Learning System, where students can choose among several explanation options for difficult words. Some of these options (e.g. glosses) have received a good deal of attention in the ICALL/Second Language (L2) Acquisition literature; in contrast, literature on examples has been the near exclusive province of lexicographers. The selection of examples is explored from an educational, L2 teaching point of view: the thesis is intended as a first exploration of the question of what makes an example helpful to the L2 student from the perspective of L2 teachers. An important motivation for this work is that selecting examples from a dictionary or randomly from a corpus has several drawbacks: first, the number of available dictionary examples is limited; second, the examples fail to take into account the context in which the word was encountered; and third, the rationale and precise principles behind the selection of dictionary examples is usually less than clear. Central to this thesis is the hypothesis that a random selection of example sentences from a suitable corpus can be improved by a guided selection process that takes into account characteristics of helpful examples. This is investigated by an empirical study conducted with teachers of L2 German. The teacher data show that four dimensions are significant criteria amenable to analysis: (a) reduced syntactic complexity, (b) sentence similarity, provision of (c) significant co-occurrences and (d) semantically related words. Models based on these dimensions are developed using logistic regression analysis, and evaluated through two further empirical studies with teachers and students of L2 German. The results of the teacher evaluation are encouraging: for the teacher evaluation, they indicate that, for one of the models, the top-ranked selections perform on the same level as dictionary examples. In addition, the model provides a ranking of potential examples that roughly corresponds to that of experienced teachers of L2 German. The student evaluation confirms and notably improves on the teacher evaluation in that the best-performing model of the teacher evaluation significantly outperforms both random corpus selections and dictionary examples (when a penalty for missing entries is included).

Mémoire numérisé par la Division de la gestion de documents et des archives de l'Université de Montréal.