Fiim as a Rich Envioronment for Language Learning (Special Issue Dedicated to Professor NAKAMURA, Shoko)

One problem nearly inherent in language classrooms is the absence of meaningful context. Context to support language forms usually consist of pictures, imaginary role plays, gestures, and the verbal environment with of the burden of meaning resting upon the language itself. This poses problems because the learner has limited ability to comprehend the target language; this is the criteria for he or she to be in the class. The risk of language being meaningless, or mapped onto incorrect meanings, is greater when language itself bears the burden as the primary material for the construction of meaning. The purpose of this paper is to offer film, particularly feature films as a rich environment for second language instruction. Film provides a rich environment for meaning construction offering non-verbal information which offers considerable assistance for second language learners’ comprehension of the target language. Issues discussed will include both cognitive processes of film and language comprehension and teaching practices

批判理論におけるシティズンシップとエトノス : 訳者解説にかえて

Jurgen Habermas visited South Korea in April of 1996. During 15 days staying he presented tseo-nam lecture at Seoul National University. That title was \u27National Unification and Popular Sovereignty\u27. Im my view, this lecture is very important for the Asian Critical Theory. Because he showed the way to apply his social theory to Korea, in general to Asia. In my translator\u27s explalation, I deal with some points at issue. Especially I refer to the comment to Habermas given by Paik Nak-Chung. By comparing Habermas with Paik Nak-Chung, I have got some aspirations to synthesize the theory of citizenship and the theory of Ethnos. This would contribute the formation of the Asian Critical Theory

Christian Contribution to the Spiritual Care of the Sick Part 1 : Potentialities of Vatican II Reform

The Second Vatican Council took a bold step by shifting the focus of the sacrament of extreme unction to" pastoral care of the sick." Mary Collins identifies that this shift addresses the question: "What of the church\u27s continuing ministry to the sick, prior to their sacramental anointing or subsequent of it?" The possibility of care in the modern sense emerged within the scope of Catholic ministry. In offering pastoral care to the sick, pragmatic interests of any kind and redemptive emphases appear to have become secondary. I have, instead, identified two interrelated theological concepts and a renewed Christian anthropological perspective as pivotal for the development of a richer theology of pastoral care of the sick. The two concepts are initiation and community. Christian pastoral care of the sick, fundamentally, consists of the assurance of membership in the baptismal community and of God\u27s faithfulness to this community. The new emphasis of the laying on of hands is as a reminder of the baptismal vow and of communion. The other pivot of the new anthropology comes from a deepened Christology.The sick person is invited to participate in the fullness of the paschal mystery of the Christ. As Empereur characterizes, anointing designates the sick into a prophetic role. The sick person, thus, ministers to the community

グラムシ シミン シャカイ ガイネン ノ コウゾウ コッカ ガイネン ノ カイドク ニ ムケテ

This paper argues that Antonio Gramsci’s concept of“civil society” constitutes a self-comprehending logical structure. Through his works, Gramsci defines“civil society”as follows : (1)the whole of“private”organizations, (2)“private”apparatus of hegemony, (3) hegemony, and (4)“a determinate social group”(a leading class). How can these four definitions be unified in one theory? The upper social group is the subject instituting“civil society”. The hegemony is a function of this social group that organaizes“private”organizations of other social groups. Then the“private”apparatus of hegemony is the same with “private” organization of this social group itself. Consequently, the definition of the whole of“private”orgnizations comes under the total definition of“civil society”. On the otherhand, “civil society”as the whole of“private”organizations means the social group itself which realized as a subject. That is, this social group has become a total“civil society”by instituting“civil society”as the whole of “private”organizations. In this sense,“civil society”in total has been identified with the social group. Therefore,“civil society”in total comprehends the social group that is the“civil society”itself. This is how Gramsci’s concept of“civil society”is formed as a dialectical concept that comprehends itself