No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the author.
The Encyclopedia of Applied Linguistics
Abstract
Trademark (legally often shortened to mark) is a term used commonly to describe words and images that are intended to distinguish uniquely the commercial source of a product or service from that of competitors.Keywords:applied psychology;language and social interaction;pragmatics;psycholinguistics;forensic linguistics;language for specific purposes
... Multilingual education practices have been implemented for millennia (Franceschini 2013), although for many centuries those who could enjoy such training belonged only to certain high social status. ...
... Multilingual education practices have been implemented for millennia (Franceschini 2013), although for many centuries those who could enjoy such training belonged only to certain high social status. Nowadays, very distant and diverse societies are well aware of the importance attached to foreign language learning and, consequently, education systems all over the world are committed to improving their students' foreign language proficiency. ...
Share online access to your article with up to 50 colleagues by forwarding this eprint link: http://www.tandfonline.com/eprint/smQA6Fa8r7cIUFxtKJEH/full
Content and language integrated learning (CLIL) programmes are mushrooming in many different contexts. However, research has mainly focused on their impact on foreign language learning and to a lesser extent on L1 development, whereas the number of studies undertaken in multilingual contexts in which more than two languages coexist is negligible. In an attempt to fill this gap, the overall aim of this research study was to examine the effect of CLIL on the learning of three languages in contact, namely English, Basque and Spanish in the Basque Country, Spain. With this objective in mind, two test rounds were conducted in a longitudinal study spanning one year and in which 285 secondary education students took part. The results revealed significantly higher scores on the part of the CLIL students in English (which represents the L3 and the foreign language in this context) in both test rounds, although a similar linguistic development between the experimental CLIL and the control non-CLIL groups was observed. Additionally, no significant differences were found in the students’ L1 and L2 development (Spanish and Basque), despite the fact that CLIL students had a lower exposure to Basque in the school context.
Competence and expertise are used, in some writings in translation studies (TS), and indeed also in some dictionaries, as synonyms for each other. The PACTE group has made one of the most ambitious contributions to the definition and investigation of translation competence. PACTE lists five main competences: the bilingual sub-competence consisting of procedural knowledge, extralinguistic sub-competence consisting of declarative knowledge, knowledge about translation, instrumental sub-competence, and strategic sub-competence, meaning, for example, the ability to choose the right methodology, to identify the translation problem and solve it, and to evaluate the translation process. PACTE also includes an additional, auxiliary competence encompassing such psycho-physiological components as memory, perception, attention, emotion, intellectual curiosity, perseverance, rigor, critical thinking, creativity, and logical reasoning. Research into the cognitive processes of translation and interpreting indicates that there are specific competences that develop for interpreting and translation, and that some of those competences develop with experience.
Background
Difficulty participating in conversation is commonly experienced by individuals with dementia, secondary to cognitive and language deficits. Frequent communication partners (FCPs), however, report being largely unaware of how to support their conversation partners with dementia during conversation. In particular, taking a turn appropriately may be difficult for either partner due to trouble predicting a partner's behaviour and, hence, difficulty with timing conversational turns appropriately, potentially resulting in overlapping talk. AimsTo investigate the patterns of overlapping talk in the interaction between individuals with dementia and their FCPs. Methods & ProceduresThree participants with moderate-severe dementia participated in conversation with an FCP. Ten minutes of casual' and task-oriented' conversation were audio- and video-recorded. Patterns of overlapping talk were investigated using conversation analytic methods. Outcomes & ResultsOverlapping talk was a consistent feature of all three dyadic interactions during both social and task-oriented talk. All participants exhibited competitive and non-competitive forms of overlapping talk. The data reveal that FCPs commonly yielded their own turns when overlapped by a partner in order to create opportunities for their partners with dementia to communicate. Participants with dementia demonstrated some retained pragmatic abilities, both using continuers and yielding the floor to their partner when competitively overlapped in order to encourage a speaker to continue. Conclusions & ImplicationsThese findings contribute to the understanding of the impact of dementia on the maintenance of sensitivity to the sequential aspects of everyday talk. From a clinical perspective, these findings can inform the training of FCPs about retained abilities and evidence-based support strategies, equipping them with knowledge and skills to structure and maintain fluent conversation.
This paper examines the performance of automatically classifying five tone choices (i.e., falling, rising, rising-falling, falling-rising, and neutral) of Brazil’s intonation model. We tested two machine learning classifiers (neural network and boosting ensemble) in two configurations (multi-class and pairwise coupling) and a rule-based classifier. Three sets of acoustic features built from the TILT and Bézier pitch contour models and a new four-point pitch contour model we introduced here were investigated. Tone choices are one of the key elements of Brazil’s prosodic intonation model. We found the rule-based classifier, which was built on our four-point model, achieved better results than the others with an accuracy of 75.1 % and a Cohen’s kappa coefficient of 0.73. This research proves that it is possible to classify tone choices with an accuracy reaching close to the percentage of agreement between two human analysts. The findings further concluded that our four-point model was better for classifying Brazil’s tone choices than both of the TILT or Bézier models.
American law discourages trademark registration of words that look and sound like surnames, yet some surnames are trademarks or parts thereof. The controlling issue in determining whether a mark is “primarily merely a surname” is its primary significance to the purchasing public, but several factors contribute to this determination: (1) surname rareness; (2) personal relation to the surname; (3) alternate meanings; (4) whether the mark has the structure and pronunciation of a surname; and (5) the mark's style. Thus, rarer, semantically developed, transparently onomastic words have a better chance of trademark status: it is by no means easy to determine what counts as the look and sound of a surname. Trademark law inadvertently promotes onomastic discrimination. Because the mass of American consumers easily identifies Western European surnames, those names are better protected from commercial appropriation. The “look and sound of a surname,” after all, is culturally determined. As a result, the law both reflects and reinforces attitudes about what counts as a surname and what doesn't.
This article provides an overview of expert evidence given by linguists in Australian courts. This linguistic evidence has been primarily in two areas: analysis of police records of interview, and speaker identification on taperecordings. While linguistic evidence in the latter area tends to be uncontested, most courts have ruled that linguistic evidence concerning police records of interview is not legally admissible. Increased attention from the media, the legal profession and linguists themselves appears to be pointing the way to acceptability.
Under current court practice, it is not difficult for anyone with a PhD in English or linguistics to be allowed to testify as a 'linguistics expert' in many types of cases. Linguists and professors of English may, however, find themselves in ethically questionable and professionally embarrassing situations if they attempt to assert expertise in subfields at the margins of their linguistic specialization. This paper briefly describes some such situations and suggests ways in which linguists, through such organizations as the International Association of Forensic Linguists (IAFL), the American Association for Applied Linguistics (AAA L), the International Association for Forensic Phonetics and Acoustics (IAFPA), and the Linguistic Society of America (LSA), can improve the qualifications of linguistics legal consultants without getting into the business of actually licensing experts or attempting to maintain registries of approved forensic experts. A Code of Practice could recommend such attributes of the qualified forensic linguist as specialized publication in forensic linguistics, teaching courses in forensic domains, and active membership in specialized forensic linguistic organizations and professional organizations dedicated to subfields that are most relevant to one's area of forensic testimony (for example, for trademark expertise, organizations devoted to the study of lexicography). The pros and cons of incorporating credentialing criteria into any 'Guidelines for Consultants' are also presented.
American Speech 77.4 (2002) 344-357
I had the distinct privilege of knowing Fred Cassidy during the last 40 years of his life. In 1962, with my then-recent Ph.D. in English linguistics from Case Western Reserve University, I had the audacity to send him one of the only five carbon copies of my doctoral dissertation on the dialects of northern Illinois, mentored by Raven I. McDavid, Jr. (this was, of course, long before photocopying was common). His response was, as always, encouraging and helpful. Three years later, I conducted a summer workshop for secondary teachers of English at Michigan State University and invited Cassidy to give a series of lectures on dictionaries and language change. His talks were, as one might expect, brilliant and very positively received. At that point we began a 35-year correspondence, ending only with his death. His influence on my career was tremendous, even though I soon left the study of dialectology per se and spent most of my life first doing sociolinguistics, then forensic linguistics. Today, as I consult with attorneys on civil and criminal law cases, his teaching is still a force in my life, as the following attests.
Many lawyers, judges, and juries are pretty much like everyone else when it comes to dictionaries. They seem to think that if you quote the dictionary, you've established whatever authority you need. The notion that "the dictionary" stands for all dictionaries is still as pervasive as it was when this authoritarian attitude was pointed out in Robertson (1954, 344) some 50 years ago:
This paper describes some of the problems that the legal community faces in using dictionaries at trial, including the problems of their authoritativeness, of their selective use, of the necessary incompleteness of their entries, of phantom definitions, and of the inequality of the dictionaries themselves. Not surprisingly, these were some of the same points that Cassidy made to my high school English teachers in 1965.
Just what authority does a dictionary really have? In trademark infringement cases, the courts sometimes rely on dictionaries. Curiously, however, the courts also give evidence of assigning authority to themselves alone, since the authority of the field of law seems to rank even higher than that of "the" dictionary. Inconsistency in just how authoritative dictionaries are considered by different courts is documented by Robinson (1982). Landau (1989, 298-302) observes that lawyers and lexicographers are in a constant conflict that grows out of their respective differences in task and goal. Even when dictionaries disclaim any responsibility for affecting the trademark status of entries, such disclaimers can be of little avail. When a trademark is used by the general public as though it were a generic word, the dictionary makers are obliged to record that usage. Otherwise, the reading public would be deprived of knowledge of how the language is used by the public. Some trademark owners object to such reporting of actual usage, however scientifically gathered or accurate it may be, claiming that a generic use of their trademark, including a figurative use cited in a dictionary, violates trademark law. If lexicographers still deign to pursue their primary obligation to report actual usage, they risk receiving threatening letters from counsel for the trademark owner that suggest the possibility of a trademark infringement case. So the authority of lexicography comes face to face with the authority of law.
When one examines current commonly used and respected dictionaries, one can find evidence that the law actually has control over at least some language policy. The most recent editions of Merriam-Webster's Collegiate Dictionary (10th ed., 1993) and The American Heritage Dictionary (4th ed., 2000), for example, contain the entry Band-Aid, capitalized, noted as a trademark...
Both theoretical linguists and trademark lawyers are deeply interested in the similarity and differences between words, but approach the issue of lexical similarity in different ways. This article highlights the contribution that linguistics can make to the comparison of competing trademarks. Using relevant legislation, legal commentary and case studies of linguistic reports presented to South African law courts, the article investigates the kinds of evidence, methods and resources linguists can use to help the courts clarify the question of how similar two competing trademarks are, and looks at ways of presenting theoretical analyses that are maximally comprehensible and useful to the court.
The traditional perception is that trade marks signal the origin of goods and services. The perception is challenged in this article. It is argued that trade marks are an important component of popular culture. Popular culture thrives in a fluid, unregulated environment. Yet the rhetoric of trade mark law is that the great open commons of the English language require the protective mantle of regulation: 'trade marks' should be narrowly defined and thresholds for registration set high in order that the language commons should remain in their pristine natural state; while at the other end infringement of a registered trade mark should be narrowly construed to avoid anything that would grant a full 'proprietary' right in a trade mark. The article explores the evolution of such ideas and their apparent hold still over the law. It is observed that there is a more sophisticated understanding now of the nature and function of language as a cultural device compared with that which existed at the time the British trade mark registration system was established. And it is suggested that trade marks that develop a cultural dimension should be granted rights accordingly. Regulation in the name of protecting the language commons should be kept to a minimum, targeting cases where trade mark owners seek to use their trade marks as instruments of censorship and control.
Why do so many people voluntarily consent to searches by have the police search their person or vehicle when they know that they are carrying contraband or evidence of illegal activity? Does everyone understand the Miranda warning? How well can people recognize a voice on tape? Can linguistic experts identify who wrote an anonymous threatening letter? Speaking of Crime answers these questions and examines the complex role of language within our criminal justice system. Lawrence M. Solan and Peter M. Tiersma compile numerous cases, ranging from the Lindbergh kidnapping to the impeachment trial of Bill Clinton to the JonBenét Ramsey case, that provide real-life examples of how language functions in arrests, investigations, interrogations, confessions, and trials. In a clear and accessible style, Solan and Tiersma show how recent advances in the study of language can aid in understanding how legal problems arise and how they might be solved. With compelling discussions current issues and controversies, this book is a provocative state-of-the-art survey that will be of enormous value to legal scholars and professionals throughout the criminal justice system.
Report written for the court's consideration in a likelihood-of-confusion case in 2005 involving rival trademarks Paltomiel and Palto con Miel http
- M Oyanedel
- J L Samaniego
Statement of witness: Report into allegations of intellectual property infringement with respect to the Internet domain name www
- J Olsson
Report of Dr. Christopher Heffer dated 28
- C Heffer