Praeceptor Golden Anniversary, 1937

Golden Anniversary 1887-1937 This material is also contained in the 1937 Praeceptor.https://red.mnstate.edu/yearbooks/1057/thumbnail.jp

Golden anniversary

Reprint of advertisement from the Orlando, Florida, Sentinel Star, 1937 for the golden anniversary of the Curtis and O\u27Neal Company 1887-1937

Moorhead State Teachers College, 1887-1937, 50th Anniversary Album (1937)

https://red.mnstate.edu/histories/1013/thumbnail.jp

Program for Through the Portals: Moorhead State Teachers College, 1887-1937 (1937)

Part I Red Man\u27s VisionPart II The Pioneer\u27s DreamPart III A Statesman\u27s IdealsPart IV Yesterday and To-dayScene 1 Co-eds of the Early DaysScene 2 The First Training SchoolScene 3 Athletics and Physical EducationScene 4 The Fine Arts (a) Music (b) Drama (c) ArtScene 5 The College OrganizationsScene 6 An Evening in the College HomeScene 7 The Call to Arms, 1917Scene 8 Normal School Becomes State Teachers College, 1921Scene 9 Granting of First College Degree, 1926Scene 10 The Passing of Old Main , 1930Scene 11 The New College (a) Birth of the Dragon Banner (b) Dedication of Alumni Gates, 1933Scene 12 Our LeadersPart V Through the PortalsIn the presentation of these scenes the facts of history have been followed in the main, but an effort has been made to portray the aims and the spirit of the men and women of this period rather than to give exact impersonations. Written by Lucia Askegaard, Nellie A. Price, Ethel Tainterhttps://red.mnstate.edu/histories/1023/thumbnail.jp

The Praeceptor, 1887-1937, Golden Anniversary (1937)

https://red.mnstate.edu/histories/1022/thumbnail.jp

Review of \u3ci\u3eWhite Mother to a Dark Race: Settler Colonialism, Maternalism, and the Removal of Indigenous Children in the American West and Australia, 1880-1940\u3c/i\u3e by Margaret D. Jacobs

Comparative studies involving similar historical events in different locales have been neglected over the last few decades, in my opinion to the detriment of history. It is indeed gratifying to see this change with the publication recently of several important comparative works. Two that compare North America with Australia are Penelope Edmonds\u27s outstanding Urbanizing Frontiers: Indigenous Peoples and Settlers in 19th-Century Pacific Rim Cities (2010) and Katherine Ellinghaus\u27s Taking Assimilation to Heart: Marriages of White Women and Indigenous Men in Australia and the United States, 1887-1937 (2006). To this we can now add Margaret D. Jacobs\u27s important White Mother to a Dark Race. Jacobs\u27s award-winning book (2010 Bancroft Prize) builds on foundational work of many scholars while extending the accomplished and comprehensive work of the author. It is an enormous tome (over 500 pages) representing over a decade of careful research in archives and libraries across Australia and North America

Review of \u3ci\u3eWhite Mother to a Dark Race: Settler Colonialism, Maternalism, and the Removal of Indigenous Children in the American West and Australia, 1880-1940\u3c/i\u3e by Margaret D. Jacobs

Comparative studies involving similar historical events in different locales have been neglected over the last few decades, in my opinion to the detriment of history. It is indeed gratifying to see this change with the publication recently of several important comparative works. Two that compare North America with Australia are Penelope Edmonds\u27s outstanding Urbanizing Frontiers: Indigenous Peoples and Settlers in 19th-Century Pacific Rim Cities (2010) and Katherine Ellinghaus\u27s Taking Assimilation to Heart: Marriages of White Women and Indigenous Men in Australia and the United States, 1887-1937 (2006). To this we can now add Margaret D. Jacobs\u27s important White Mother to a Dark Race. Jacobs\u27s award-winning book (2010 Bancroft Prize) builds on foundational work of many scholars while extending the accomplished and comprehensive work of the author. It is an enormous tome (over 500 pages) representing over a decade of careful research in archives and libraries across Australia and North America

Мова твораў Цішкі Гартнага ў асвятленні беларускай філалагічнай навукі

The studies of the language of Ciška Hartny, a writer and a public figure (1887–1937), have a long tradition in Belarusian humanities. However, different circumstances have made these linguistic studies ambiguous. On the one hand, in the 1920s Ciška Hartny was a writer whose language was studied most intensively. Between the 1920s and 2010s several articles were published about the language used in his works. A big corpus was scientifically adopted. Some remarks on Ciška Hartny’s language was included in the academic History of the Belarusian Literary Language (1968) and in two editions of the University handbook on the history of the Belarusian literary language (1963 and 1984). A few years ago an ambitious publication by Alieś Kaŭrus made an attempt to revise modern opinions that stem from 1950s and 1960s. On the other hand, the studies of Ciška Hartny’s linguistic heritage have not been consistent and are quite fragmented. During the mid-1930s and 1950s no studies were conducted on the writer’s language. This is common practice when researches do not consider the findings of predecessors. Until the present day there has been no incorporation into Belarusian linguistics of Jazep Liosik’s fundamental study of the late 1920s. The relevant methodology to study Hartny’s language as a part of the history of the Belarusian literary language is still absent. We observe a tendency to this day to evaluate Ciška Hartny’s language as a (potential) part of the modern literary language rather than from the viewpoint of the Belarusian literary language’s history.Studia nad językiem publikacji pisarza, działacza społecznego i państwowego Ciszki Hartnego (1887–1937) w obrębie nauk filologicznych na Białorusi trwają od dawna, jednak zawierają wiele sądów polemicznych, żeby nie stwierdzić sprzecznych. Z jednej strony jest to pisarz, który aktywnie tworzył w latach 20. XX w., a język jego utworów poddawano bardzo intensywnym badaniom. W okresie 1920–2010 na ten temat opublikowano kilka artykułów. W obiegu naukowym znajduje się bogaty materiał faktograficzny. Językowi Hartnego poświęcono też fragment monografii pt. Historia białoruskiego języka literackiego z 1968 r. oraz rozdziały podręcznika akademickiego z zakresu historii literatury białoruskiej (1963 і 1984 r.). Kilka lat temu ukazała się monografia Alesia Kaurusa, który dokonał próby ponownej oceny publikacji z końca 1950–1960 r. Z drugiej strony opracowywanie dziedzictwa językowego Hartnego charakteryzuje brak ciągłości. W okresie poł. 1930. – kon. 1950. lat nikt nie zgłębiał języka Hartnego. Przyjęła się tradycja nie brać pod uwagę wcześniejszych prac, np. do dziś w badaniach nie znalazło oddźwięku solidne opracowanie Jazepa Losika powstałe pod koniec lat 20. XX w. Brakuje należytej metodologii opisu języka Hartnego jako części składowej historii białoruskiego języka literackiego. Do dziś język Hartnego jest oceniany nie z perspektywy historycznej, tylko jako potencjalna realizacji współczesnego języka literackiego.Вывучэнне мовы твораў пісьменніка, грамадскага і дзяржаўнага дзеяча Цішкі Гартнага (1887–1937) мае ў беларускай філалогіі даўнюю традыцыю, але розныя акалічнасці зрабілі гэтую частку беларускай лінгвістыкі неадназначнай. З аднаго боку, у 1920-я гг. Ц. Гартны быў пісьменнікам, мова твораў якога вывучалася найбольш інтэнсіўна. На працягу 1920–2010 гг. было апублікавана некалькі артыкулаў на даную тэму. У навуковы ўжытак уведзены вялікі фактычны матэрыял. Мова твораў Ц. Гартнага не была абойдзена ўвагай у акадэмічнай Гісторыі беларускай літаратурнай мовы 1968 г. і ў двух выданнях універсітэцкага падручніка па гісторыі беларускай літаратурнай мовы 1963 і 1984 г. Некалькі гадоў таму з’явілася амбіцыйная публікацыя Алеся Каўруса, у якой была здзейснена спроба перагледзець ацэнкі, якія сягаюць сваімі вытокамі ў канец 1950–1960 гг. З другога боку, вывучэнню моўнай спадчыны Ц. Гартнага ўласціва перарывістасць і адсутнасць пераемнасці. На працягу сярэдзіны 1930 – канца 1950-х гг. мова твораў пісьменніка зусім не вывучалася. Звычайнай з’яўляецца практыка, калі даследчыкі не ўлічваюць здабыткаў сваіх папярэднікаў. Да сённяшняга дня не знайшоў водгуку ў беларускай лінгвістыцы грунтоўны артыкул Язэпа Лёсіка канца 1920-х гг. Адсутнічае належная метадалогія для вывучэння мовы Ц. Гартнага як складовай часткі гісторыі беларускай літаратурнай мовы. Уключна да самага апошняга часу існуе тэндэнцыя ацэньваць мову твораў Ц. Гартнага не праз прызму гісторыі беларускай мовы, а трактаваць яе як (патэнцыяльную) частку сучаснай літаратурнай мовы