User:Dan Pelleg/Sandbox
User:Dan Pelleg/Sandbox/Template:Crop User:Dan Pelleg/Sandbox/Sortability bug
Jun[edit]
亲爱的俊
圣诞快乐！123
tu[edit]
To support the claim that the offset overhand bend "can fail by capsizing under high loads", four videos are referred to as sources.
- This video (sorce 6 in current version) does not show a knot capsizing under high loads, but rather a rope ripping where there is no knot (time code 02:30). Plus the knot in this video is a double fisherman's knot, not an offset overhand bend. I assume removing this source would be uncontroversial.
- This one and this one (sorces 4 and 5 in current version) are obviously self-published (and therefore unreliable due to complete lack of editorial gate-keeping) and provide no pertinent data such as force, rope material or rope measurements. In the second video of these two it's not unequivocal whether the knot capsized or the rope ripped inside the knot. Both these videos are therefore too dubious to serve as reliable sources and should be removed.
Dan ☺ 14:29, 11 May 2020 (UTC)
☺☺☺
Georges Henein[edit]
Versions[edit]
Yessir! (working title).
The thesis: The authoritarian personality as a vicious circle, a psychological state that perpetuates itself.
We design a journey along two paths: on the one hand through core concepts that make up the so-called authoritarian personality according to Adorno et al. and Fromm, and on the other hand in parallel through the inner experiencing of events in the life of a protagonist.
In contradistinction to the protagonist, a counter-figure is always present in some form: the authority. This authority undergoes various transformations - father, superego, pack leader, demagogue - but always remains a manifestation of the same principle.
Structurally, The Journey is divided into seven sections, each of which takes place in its own distinct spatial setting: Abstractions of everyday places familiar to the protagonist. Segment No. 6 deviates exceptionally from Adorno and Fromm's scheme of the authoritarian personality, drawing inspiration from Fromm's reflections on the concept of love.
Tragically, the journey ultimately turns out to be a vicious circle: where it ends, the same journey begins anew.
The protagonist himself is not represented by a dancer, but by alternative means, e.g. by alluding to the audience or to a gap or void, sometimes by using silhouettes or video projections. We thus effectively experience the events through his eyes.
A concretisation of the stage design and the dance realisation takes place in each case during further processing with the set designers and the dancers.
The seven sections are: A. In Adorno's vocabulary:
1. authoritarian hierarchy 2. anti-intraception 3. conformity 4. submissiveness to authority 5. violence 6. love 7. projection
B. Simultaneously in the mirror of the events experienced by the protagonist:
1. subjugation by the father 2. contempt for one's own inwardness 3. flight into the masses 4. submission to an autocratic person 5. capitulation to one's own destructiveness 6. self-transformation through a transformative experience 7. breach of trust and relapse. We have collected thoughts - mainly from the paradigms of the authoritarian personality - on these seven segments, each of which provides a generally valid context for the envisaged stage action.
1. authoritarian hierarchy / subjugation by the father → concretisation: the hierarchical-authoritarian family. The thematic basis is the occurrence of parents with the psychological need for dominance, who force their child to obey conventional behaviour by means of threats. Related to this would be the gender inequality and the male chauvinism associated with it.
- As a spatial design approach, we chose the family dining room, where the stage action emerges from a stereotypical family dinner.
2. anti-intraception / contempt for one's own inwardness. In Adorno's context, the term intraception denotes inwardness: emotionalism or emphasising of feelings, subjectivity, sensitivity, imagination, aestheticism and self-criticism. Anti-intraception is the contempt for all these principles. Concretisation: Lonely ruminations, wrestling with oneself, self-castigation, caused by self-confrontation and cognitive dissonance. Possible accompanying theme: the mother as a counter-figure to the father.
- We chose the children's room as a spatial design approach.
3. conformity / flight into the masses → concretisation: subordinating oneself at a protest. According to the contagion theory of Gustave Le Bon / Psychology of the Masses (1895), social groups have a hypnotic effect on their members. Protected in the anonymity of the crowd, people give up their personal responsibility and surrender to the contagious feelings of the mass. The crowd thus develops a life of its own, stirs up emotions and tends to incite people to act irrationally.
Our protagonist joins a crowd as an escape from inner conflict.
- Spatial design approach: A street.
4. submissiveness to authority / self-surrender, -sacrifice to authority → concretisation: participation in a mass rally. In this segment, we take our cue from Fromm's concept of "sado-masochism", which does not refer to sexual practices but only to the relationship to authority. In the authoritarian personality, two opposites merge: on the one hand, the pleasure of domination of a weaker person and satisfaction through the exercise of power, and on the other hand, the pleasure of submission to a stronger person, satisfaction through obedience. This is what Fromm calls sadomasochism, not in relation to sexual practices, but only in relation to authority:
"This terminology is also justified by the fact that the sado-masochist is always characterised by his attitude towards authority. He admires authority and strives to submit to it; but at the same time he wants to be authority himself and to make others submissive to him." (1941/1978, S. 163)
Through his identification with power holders, the authoritarian character avoids confrontation with his insignificance and powerlessness. The authoritarian social structure thus produces the need for obedience, submission and the exercise of power and at the same time binds the individual to authorities and hierarchical structures that satisfy these needs.
- Spatial design approach: marketplace / central urban plaza.
5. violence / capitulation to one's own desire for destruction → concretisation: tagging along with violent riots (looting or the like) and indulging in brute force. Generally valid terms in this context are e.g. mob: a crowd of people gathering together, acting in a group-dynamic manner, with short-term destructive goals: plundering, influx to public executions, lynch law, etc.; ochlocracy: rule of the crowd, mob rule. We consider the destructiveness as an infantile vestige.
- Spatial design approach: the street once again.
6. love → concretisation: self-transformation through a transformative experience by an act of compassion in which the protagonist experiences a momentary salvation. In this fragment, we briefly depart from the paradigms of the authoritarian personality and make a detour, as it were, into Fromm's world of ideas concerning love. Furthermore, we borrow the principle of so-called "transformative experiences" from ideas of Laurie Ann Paul, professor of philosophy and cognitive science at Yale University, who describes such processes as those in which a rational decision-making process is not possible because the experience fundamentally changes the person who experiences it. Following this, we speculate on the after-effects of an unexpected act of compassion or benevolence on our protagonist.
- Spatial design approach: A place that seems to be outside of space and time.
7. projection / breach of trust and relapse. In the reverberation of the unexpectedly felt love, our protagonist experiences fear of a developing libidinal passion. Love becomes a love-hate relationship, so to speak.
Projection is the shifting of one's own subconscious self-perceptions (emotions, affects, desires, impulses and characteristics) onto other persons when a contradiction arises between these self-perceptions and one's own standards, whereby inner-psychic conflicts and the confrontation with them are avoided. Love arouses emotions in our protagonist that remind him of sensations from his childhood or youth, but which he has rejected. He reproaches the beloved for this as a vice. As a result, he falls back into the vicious circle from which he seemed to have been rescued for a short while. - Room design approach: The bedroom.
© Marko E. Weigert, Dan Pelleg,
wee dance company of the Gerhart-Hauptmann-Theater Görlitz-Zittau, 15.02.2022
ab[edit]
|
| Hebrew alphabet | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Script type | |
Time period | 3rd century BCE to present |
| Languages | Hebrew, Yiddish, Ladino, and Judeo-Arabic (see Jewish languages) |
| Related scripts | |
Parent systems | |
Sister systems | Nabataean Syriac Palmyrenean Mandaic Brāhmī Pahlavi Sogdian |
| ISO 15924 | |
| ISO 15924 | Hebr (125), Hebrew |
| Unicode | |
Unicode alias | Hebrew |
| U+0590 to U+05FF, U+FB1D to U+FB4F | |
cd[edit]
|
| Hebrew alphabet | |
|---|---|
| |
| Script type | |
Time period | 3rd century BCE to present |
| Languages | Hebrew, Yiddish, Ladino, and Judeo-Arabic (see Jewish languages) |
| Related scripts | |
Parent systems | |
Sister systems | Nabataean Syriac Palmyrenean Mandaic Brāhmī Pahlavi Sogdian |
| ISO 15924 | |
| ISO 15924 | Hebr (125), Hebrew |
| Unicode | |
Unicode alias | Hebrew |
| U+0590 to U+05FF, U+FB1D to U+FB4F | |
sign[edit]
The Event (typographically stylized THEEVƎNT)
vowels[edit]
try1[edit]
| IPA vowel chart | image | ||
| Front | Central | Back | |
| Close | |||
| Mid | |||
| Open | |||
try2[edit]
| |||||||||||
| The vowel phonemes of Modern Israeli Hebrew | |||||||||||
diphthong in ipa blink[edit]
{{IPAlink|ej}}
notes & refs[edit]
1[edit]
| This works: | |
|---|---|
|
text[nested_first 1] text.[nested_first 2]
|
text<ref name=n1 group=nested_first/>
text<ref name=n2 group=nested_first/>.
;Reflist, nested ref listed first:{{reflist|group=nested_first|refs=
→ {{#tag:ref|With nested reference<ref>content
of nested reference</ref>|name=n1|group=nested_first}}
→ <ref name=n2 group=nested_first>With no nested reference</ref>}}
;Nested refs:
{{reflist}}
|
| This not: | |
|
text[nested_second 1] text.[nested_second 2]
|
text<ref name=n3 group=nested_second/>
text<ref name=n4 group=nested_second/>.
;Reflist, nested ref listed second:{{reflist|group=nested_second|refs=
→ <ref name=n3 group=nested_second>With no nested reference</ref>
→ {{#tag:ref|With nested reference<ref>content
of nested reference</ref>|name=n4|group=nested_second}}
}}
;Nested refs:
{{reflist}}
|
2[edit]
text with note note_init_omit.[note2 1]
text with note note_w.[note2 2]
text with note note_vav_dgusha.[note2 3]
- Notes
- Refs
3[edit]
ref1,2[1][2]) note1[Notes 1]), situated 16 kilometres (10 mi) ref5[5]
thing1[thINgas 1]), ohne1[ohne 1] mit1[mit 1]
References[edit]
- Footnotes
- thINgas!s
- ohnes
- ^ in-ohne1
- mits
- Citations
fox[edit]
listen[edit]
alarm
ǀ
ǂ
ǁ
o[edit]
another lede monster: YIVO:
- YIVO, (Yiddish: ייִוואָ), established in 1925 in Wilno, Poland (now Vilnius, Lithuania) as the Yidisher Visnshaftlekher Institut (Yiddish: ייִדישער װיסנשאַפֿטלעכער אינסטיטוט), or Jewish Scientific Institute[1] (ייִדישער yidisher = Jewish or Yiddish, depending on the context), is a source for orthography, lexicography, and other studies related to the Yiddish language. Though it was later renamed the Institute for Jewish Research, it is almost always known by its original initials, which, in Yiddish, form the acronym "ייווא", transliterated as "YIVO".
- Note
- *^
An exception to this rule seems to be מְלאי
ו'יליאם[edit]
inline element[edit]
inline table[edit]
no blockquote, text before
 |
text after.
- Colon blockquote, text before
text after.
- Asterisk blockquote, text before
text after.
inline div[edit]
no blockquote, text before
text after.
- Colon blockquote, text beforetext after.
- Asterisk blockquote, text beforetext after.
liason[edit]
[‿ a‿i]
Hebrew phonology[edit]
Consonants[edit]
Below are the consonants of modern General Israeli Hebrew. For each sound, its Hebrew orthography, its phonemic transliteration and its pronunciation are displayed in the following format:
| Hebrew orthography: | שׁ |
| phonemic transliteration: | /š/ |
| pronunciation: | [ʃ] |
The letters which may receive the diacritic dagesh kal (ב, ג, ד, כ, פ, ת) are listed with and without the dagesh as separate phonemes.[2]
Where two phonemic transliterations are possible, namely a generic vs. a strict tranliteration, the strict transliteration follows the generic one in parentheses:[3]
| Hebrew orthography: | ט |
| phonemic transliteration: | /t/ (/ṭ/) |
| pronunciation: | [t] |
Where a Hebrew letter has an additional word-final form, it is displayed after (to the left of) its regular form, separated from it by a comma:
| Hebrew orthography: | מ,ם |
| phonemic transliteration: | /m/ |
| pronunciation: | [m] |
Table[edit]
| Bilabial | Labiodental | Alveolar | Post- alveolar |
Palatal | Velar | Uvular | Glottal | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Stops |
|
|
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Affricates |
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Fricatives |
|
|
|
|
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Nasals |
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Laterals |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Approximants |
|
|
- ^ yivo
- ^ Note that Bet / Vet (ב / בּ), Kaf / Khaf (כ / כּ) and Pe / Fe (פ / פּ) still represent each two separate phonemes in modern Hebrew, whereas Gimel (ג / גּ), Daled (ד / דּ) and Taf (ת / תּ) each represent only one phoneme in modern Hebrew. The pairs (/b/, /v/), (/k/, /x/), (/p/, /f/), written respectively by the letters bet (ב), kaf (כ) and pe (פ) have historically been allophonic. In Modern Hebrew, however, all six sounds are phonemic, due to mergers involving formerly distinct sounds (/v/ merging with /w/, /k/ merging with /q/, /x/ merging with /ħ/), loss of consonant gemination (which formerly distinguished the stop members of the pairs from the fricatives when intervocalic), and the introduction of syllable-initial /f/ through foreign borrowings.
- ^ Some historically distinctive Hebrew phonemes have merged in modern Hebrew, such are historically distinctive /t/, /ṯ/, /ṭ/), written respectively by the letters Tav (תּ), Ṯav (ת) and Ṭet (ט), in modern Israeli Hebrew all pronounced [t]. For these cases, the Academy of the Hebrew Language suggests two tranliteration sets, a generic one, reflecting modern phonology, and a strict one, reflecting the orthographic distinctions, which are still in use, and the historical phonology. See transliteration rules set by the Academy of the Hebrew Language.
- ^ a b c d The Voiced labial-velar approximant [w] and postalveolar sounds (with the exception of [ʃ]) are not native to Hebrew, and only found in borrowings.
- ^ idiolectally sometimes a uvular trill [ʀ], common among non native speakers also as an alveolar trill [r] or tap [ɾ].
Notes[edit]
- The phoneme /v/ is represented by two letters: vet (ב, unemphasized bet) and vav (ו). Although modern Hebrew pronunciation does not differentiate between the two, the latter is historically weaker due to its being a semi-vowel (/w/).
- The phoneme /k/ is represented by two letters: kaf (כ) and quf (ק). Although modern Israeli Hebrew pronunciation doesn't differentiate between the two, the latter is pronounced by some speakers as in Arabic /q/.
- The phoneme /t/ is represented by two letters: tet (ט) and tav (ת). The tet was historically pronounced with pharyngealization (as in Arabic) or as an ejective (often, but misleadingly, called "emphasis"). The letter tav, when intervocalic and non-doubled (i.e. without dagesh) represented a fricative [θ]. For example, what in Modern Hebrew is /bet ˈleχem/ (or /bejt ˈleχem/) was transcribed (through Greek, which is ill-equipped to represent /ħ/) into English from Old Hebrew as "Bethleem", also demonstrating note number 5. The traditional Ashkenazi pronunciation of tau without dagesh as "s" is a continuation of this former distinction.
- In old Hebrew the צ (/ʦ/) was, like ט, pharyngealized or ejective ("emphasis"). Currently, the only community of Hebrew-speakers which expresses this in speech are Yemenite Jews, whose Hebrew did not lose them, as other communities did under the influence of Yiddish and other European languages); however the emphasis led to several types of phonetic change that still exist. The exact nature of the emphatic feature is a matter of debate; the most commonly suggested possibilities are pharyngealization (as in Arabic) and glottalization (or the ejective mechanism) (as in the Ethiopian Semitic languages).
- In the speech of most modern Hebrew speakers, the phoneme /χ/ is represented by two letters: het (ח) and khaf (כ). Het is presumed to historically have been a voiceless pharyngeal fricative (like Arabic ح). The voiceless pharyngeal fricative pronunciation [ħ] is found in the speech of many Teimanim, Mizrachim and Sephardim, who, like Ashkenazim, pronounce khaf as /x/.
Vowels[edit]
| Phoneme | Pronunciation in Modern Hebrew |
Approximate pronunciation in English |
Orthographic representation | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| "Long" * | "Short" * | "Very short" / "interrupted" * | |||
| /a/ | [ä] or [ɑ̈] (between [a] and [ɑ]) |
(as in "spa") | kamats (ָ) | patach (ַ) | chataf patach (ֲ) |
In Biblical Hebrew, each vowel had three forms: short, long and interrupted (khataf). However, there is no audible distinction between the three in modern Israeli Hebrew, except that tsere is often pronounced /eɪ/ as in Ashkenazi Hebrew.
cholam chaser[edit]
| one two three | אחת שתיים שלוש |
| one two three | אחת שתיים שלוש |
| one two three | אחת שתיים שלוש |
| one two three | אחת שתיים שלוש |
Tahitian Alphabet[edit]
The Tahitian language features 14 phonemes: five vowels and nine consonants.
| letter | name | pronunciation |
|---|---|---|
| a | ’ā | /a/, /ɑː/ |
| e | ’ē | /e/, /eː/ |
| f | fā | /f/ |
| h | hē | /h/ |
| i | ’ī | /i/, /iː/ |
| m | mō | /m/ |
| n | nū | /n/ |
| o | ’ō | /ɔ/, /oː/ |
| p | pī | /p/ |
| r | rō | /r/ |
| t | tī | /t/ |
| u | ’ū | /u/, /uː/ |
| v | vī | /v/ |
| ’ | ’eta | /ʔ/ |
The glottal stop or 'eta is a genuine consonant. This is typical of Polynesian languages (compare to the Hawaiian ʻokina and others).
CV chg[edit]
Die choreografischen Kreationen von Marko E. Weigert und Dan Pelleg gastierten bundesweit in 26 Städten, im Ausland mit Unterstützung verschiedener Goethe-Institute und deutscher Konsulate in 14 Ländern und wurden von Presse und Publikum gefeiert. Nach 12 Jahren als Leiter der freien Berliner Formation wee dance company wurden sie 2011 als Leitung der Sparte Tanz ans Gerhart-Hauptmann-Theater Görlitz-Zittau berufen, wo die Company seitdem fester Bestandteil des Hauses ist.
Gemeinsam brachten Weigert und Pelleg 20 abendfüllende Tanz-Uraufführungen und 5 Wiederaufnahmen auf die Bühnen des GHT (davon 2 mit Gästen, 3 von Gästen choreografiert) und zeichnen sich für die Choreografie von 24 Premieren des Musiktheaters und Schauspiels an diesen Bühnen verantwortlich.
Neben dem Publikumspreis beim »20. Internationalen Choreografiewettbewerb« am Opernhaus in Hannover im Jahre 2006 erhielten Pelleg & Weigert wiederholt Final-Nominierungen wie z.B. für den »Kurt-Joos-Förderpreis« Essen (2007), den »Ursula-Cain-Preis« (2017 & 2019), waren Wettbewerbsfinalisten beim Tanzwettbewerb »no ballet« in Ludwigshafen (2006 & 2007) und wurden als »Beste Compagnie 2007« für das »Dance For You Magazin« nominiert.
Dan Pellegs beruflicher Werdegang begann mit 16 Jahren interdisziplinär, als er gleichzeitig eine Ausbildung für klassischen und modernen Bühnentanz und auch für klassischen Gesang aufnahm. Dem israelischen Abitur mit den Leistungsfächern Physik und Mathematik folgte die Wehrpflicht, und danach erhielt er mit 21 Jahren ein volles Stipendium für das Interdisziplinäre Programm Adi Lautman für ausgezeichnete Studenten an der Universität Tel Aviv (unter Leitung von Prof. Yehuda Elkana) für einen Studiengang mit den Schwerpunkten Musik- und Sprachwissenschaft. Zusätzlich dazu erhielt er ein Sonderstipendium der Amerikanisch-Israelischen Kulturförder-Foundation für die Kombination Tänzer/Sänger. Mit 24 Jahren erhielt er ein Engagement beim Ensemble Batsheva, wo er 2 Jahre lang unter der Leitung von Ohad Naharin und Naomi Perlov tanzte, und siedelte anschließend nach Deutschland um, wo er bis heute lebt.
Zusätzlich zur Arbeit bei der wee dance company choreografierte Dan Pelleg u. a. am Opernhaus Kiel, für das Ballett Vorpommern, gemeinsam mit Marko E. Weigert für das Tanztheater Görlitz und für das Ballett des Saarländischen Staatstheaters Saarbrücken.
(only for Juliane) Pelleg unterrichtete Zeitgenössischen Tanz in Berlin regelmäßig bei der Tanzakademie »balance 1« und für offene Laien- und Profikurse, als Gast u.a. bei der UDK, Die Etage, die Tanzfabrik und Danceworks und gab Workshops mit der wee dance company auf Zypern und Malta, in Simbabwe, Russland, Israel und in den Niederlanden und den USA. Am Gerhart-Hauptmann-Theater leitet er als Trainingsmeister regelmäßig das tägliche Training der Tanzcompany.
Als Darsteller sammelte Pelleg eine weite Bandbreite an schauspielerischen und gesanglichen Erfahrungen durch Engagements bei den Freilichtspielen Schwäbisch Hall und der Zusammenarbeit mit Sommer Ulrickson und anderen Regisseuren. Jüngst stand er im 92Y in New York City mit Ulrickson neben dem renommierten Cellisten Alban Gerhardt und der Madrider Konzertmeisterin Gergana Gergova auf der Bühne.