Ein Fall der Hermeneutik : George Forestiers Leben, Werk und Wirkung

Aus dem Leben das Werk und aus dem Werk das Leben zu verstehen, lautet die Devise. Das Leben lässt sich deshalb aus dem Werk verstehen, weil auch und gerade das Werk, wie Peter Szondi Schleiermacher referiert, „aktive, aktuelle Äußerung des Lebens“ ist. Gerade dort, wo es Werk wurde, war das Leben wirklich Leben im Sinne Schleiermachers „hervorbrechendem Lebensmoment“ […], also bezeichnend für den Autor als Individuum und nicht gleichgültig allgemein. Aus der Menge der Erlebnisse eines Lebens gelten also nur die als wichtig, die es wert sind, in die Welt der Dichtung einzugehen. So kann der Interpret bei seiner Arbeit gar nicht fehlgehen, da am Leben des Autors nur das von ‘bleibender Bedeutung’ ist, was vom Werk ‘abgespiegelt’ wird. Im Zirkel zwischen Leben und Werk, Wahrheit und Dichtung bleibt dann nichts mehr übrig, das zum wechselseitigen Verstehen nichts beitrüge – alles andere wird aus der hermeneutischen Lektüre ausgeschlossen. Ich möchte nun diesem hermeneutischen Zirkel bei der Arbeit zusehen, um seine ungeheure Produktivität und seine Grenzen zu erkunden. Dazu greife ich aus der deutsche Literaturgeschichte einen Fall heraus, der besonders geeignet ist, die selbstverständliche Annahme eines Zusammenhang von Leben und Werk bei der Produktion wie der Rezeption von Texten vorzuführen und zu irritieren[:] Der Fall George Forestier

Book Review

This a review of Jewish Law (Mishpat Ivri): Cases and Materials by Menachem Elon, Bernard Auerbach, Daniel D. Chazin and Melvin J. Sykes. The reviewer concludes that this book is not only the first of its kind, it is also an outstanding contribution to law teaching that will be of substantial assistance to the growing number of professors teaching Jewish law in American law schools. The extensive presentation of Talmudic and other Jewish law sources, combined with the inclusion of Israeli court decisions, make this book an excellent research tool for both student and professor. Its use of authority and its notes represent scholarship that compares favorably to casebooks in other fields of law study. This book is very strong in terms of scope, writing, organization, classroom adaptability and interest. Its only flaws, if one accepts my premise as to what a Jewish law course should be, are that there is more need for (1) comparison to the American legal system, and (2) more extensive Notes including hypothetical cases to better focus discussion. A capable Professor can fill both of these limited gaps. The law school community needed a book of this type. Justice Elon and his colleagues have met this need. I applaud them for doing so with élan

Book Review

This a review of Jewish Law (Mishpat Ivri): Cases and Materials by Menachem Elon, Bernard Auerbach, Daniel D. Chazin and Melvin J. Sykes. The reviewer concludes that this book is not only the first of its kind, it is also an outstanding contribution to law teaching that will be of substantial assistance to the growing number of professors teaching Jewish law in American law schools. The extensive presentation of Talmudic and other Jewish law sources, combined with the inclusion of Israeli court decisions, make this book an excellent research tool for both student and professor. Its use of authority and its notes represent scholarship that compares favorably to casebooks in other fields of law study. This book is very strong in terms of scope, writing, organization, classroom adaptability and interest. Its only flaws, if one accepts my premise as to what a Jewish law course should be, are that there is more need for (1) comparison to the American legal system, and (2) more extensive Notes including hypothetical cases to better focus discussion. A capable Professor can fill both of these limited gaps. The law school community needed a book of this type. Justice Elon and his colleagues have met this need. I applaud them for doing so with élan

Assessing Word Similarity Metrics For Traceability Link Recovery

Der Softwareentwicklungsprozess involviert oft verschiedene Artefakte, welche jeweils verschiedene Aspekte eines Softwaresystems beschreiben. Traceability Link Recovery ist ein Verfahren, das diesen Entwicklungsprozess unterstützt, indem es verwandte Teile aus verschiedenen Artefakten verbindet. Artefakte, die in natürlicher Sprache ausgedrückt werden, sind schwierig für Maschinen zu verstehen und stellen damit eine besondere Herausforderung für die Traceability Link Recovery dar. Hierfür werden für gewöhnlich Wortähnlichkeitsmetriken eingesetzt, um unterschiedliche Wörter mit gleicher Bedeutung als Synonyme zu identifizieren. ArDoCo ist eine Software, die Wortähnlichkeitsmetriken zum Wiederherstellen von Trace Links zwischen textueller Softwarearchitekturdokumentation und formalen Architekturmodellen einsetzt. Diese Arbeit befasst sich mit dem Einfluss verschiedener Wortähnlichkeitsmetriken auf ArDoCo. Die Wortähnlichkeitsmetriken werden mit mehreren Fallstudien evaluiert. Dazu werden die Metriken Präzision und Sensitivität als auch besondere Herausforderungen der einzelnen Wortähnlichkeitsmetriken als Teil der Evaluation präsentiert

Strict Liability Comes of Age in Ohio: Almost

In June 1977 the Ohio Supreme Court decided Temple v. Wean United, Inc., and adopted the doctrine of strict liability for product liability litigation, thereby following a national trend. Earlier decisions had discussed a theory similar to strict liability and had engendered considerable confusion as to the substantive theory supporting possible recovery. Temple apparently ended the confusion

An Overview of Ohio Product Liability Law

Although claims predicated on harm caused by defective products sounding in warranty and negligence, aided and abetted by the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur, existed well before the twentieth century, product liability as we now know it was initially foreshadowed in Ohio in the seminal case of Rogers v. Toni Home Permanent Co. Shortly after the true product liability revolution began, Ohio joined the revolution with the adoption of strict liability in warranty without privity in Lonzrick v. Republic Steel Corp. The Ohio Supreme Court then recognized that this approach to strict liability was no different from the more recognized concept of strict liability in tort and adopted this principle as enunciated in the Restatement of Torts. The common law evolution of Ohio product liability law culminated with abandonment of the unreasonably dangerous requirement of the Restatement definition and recognition that the doctrine of strict liability in tort encompassed crash worthiness or second collision liability

Consular Officer\u27s Amenability as Witness

Contrary to the extensive immunities granted to members of the diplomatic service, members of consular posts are given only limited privileges and immunities. The existence and limitation of consular immunities arise by virtue of the office. Thus the consular officer can be called upon to testify in both civil and criminal matters under common law, international law, and treaty provision. In the absence of a treaty, consuls are generally exempt from giving testimony relating to matters acquired within the scope of their official duties or as to material contained in the consular archives. The purpose of this paper is to examine various treaty provisions in an effort to ascertain the manner in which a consular officer\u27s obligation to testify is set forth, the immunities given such officer and some of the problems raised by both the obligation and the immunities

Ohio Tort Reform in 1998: The War Continues

For more than a decade a war has been waged between forces seeking legislative reform of tort law, with emphasis on product liability, and the Ohio Supreme Court. The battleground has been the legislative enactments of the Ohio General Assembly. This legislation has faced consistent challenge before the court as a proper exercise of its power of judicial review. Time and time again the court\u27s philosophical approach, predicated on a need to protect injured parties and guarantee compensation for harm, has led to determinations that given legislation fails constitutional scrutiny. In a real sense, the Court has become a super legislature comprised of a somewhat consistent four member majority. State ex rel. Ohio Academy of Trial Lawyers v. Sheward foreshadows what may be the ultimate battle. The result of that battle could end the war. That end will be the unconditional surrender of tort reform advocates. Absent a significant change in the composition of the court, future efforts at tort reform which in any way impede the right of recovery will be preordained to an early demise

An Overview of Ohio Product Liability Law

Enactment of the Ohio Product Liability Act (the “Act”), which took effect on January 5, 1988, created an exclusive statutory basis for all tort based product liability claims. The statute, while eliminating the term “strict liability in tort,” is primarily a codification of preexisting common law. The Act provides that product liability claims may be predicated on one of four theories: defects in manufacture or construction; defects in design or formulation; defect in warning or instruction, and failure to conform to representation. Each of these theories had previously been recognized by the courts. For example, the requirements for a cause of action predicated on a defect in design virtually mirror the former law of strict liability in tort. As with the former law, to prevail in a product liability claim the plaintiff must establish, by a preponderance of the evidence, the existence of a defect at the time the product left the control of the manufacturer and that the defect was a proximate cause of the harm for which recovery is sought. Since its adoption, efforts to amend the Act have been ongoing. The most recent effort would, among other things, apply comparative fault principles to product liability claims and provide a defense based on substance abuse. In addition, preemptive federal legislation has been passed in both houses of Congress which would, if enacted, have a significant effect upon Ohio product liability law.The American Law Institute is now drafting a Restatement of Products Liability under the leadership of Co-Reporters James A. Henderson and Aaron D. Twerski. Drafts of several sections have been completed which, if adopted by the Institute, would represent a highly regarded source of new approaches to product liability law. If Ohio accepts the premises of this new Restatement, through amendment of the Act, the effect on the state\u27s law of product liability would be significant