Semantic

This chapter maps the terrain of thematic analysis (TA), a method for capturing patterns (“themes”) across qualitative datasets. We identify key concepts and different orientations and practices, illustrating why TA is often better understood as an umbrella term, used for sometimes quite different approaches, than a single qualitative analytic approach. Under the umbrella, three broad approaches can be identified: a “coding reliability” approach, a “codebook” approach, and a “reflexive” approach. These are often characterized by distinctive – sometimes radically different – conceptualizations of what a theme is, as well as methods for theme identification and development, and indeed coding. We then provide practical guidance on completing TA within our popular (reflexive) approach to TA, discussing each phase of the six-phase approach we have developed in relation to a project on men, rehabilitation, and embodiment. We conclude with a discussion of key concerns related to ensuring the TA you do – within whatever approach – is of the highest quality.

–New generation Web Application Firewalls (ngWAF), new Dynamic Analysis (modern DAST products) RASP and DevOps fever are making Static Analysis (SAST) techniques useless? No, Absolutely not. But commercial Static Analysis vendors have to think different if they want their products to survive. Software solutions performing automatic code analysis are still very important, especially for remediation assistance capabilities or for extracting semantic metadata. These methods gather syntactic information from the source code and/or binaries, and then in general they provide large set of implying semantics. With the increased focus on dynamic techniques for vulnerabilities detection and prevention the problem emerges – modern programming languages are dynamic and the whole code semantic is known only at runtime and the analysis has to estimate larger relations. Moreover described is a new algorithm for better contrasting the jeopardize of dynamic analysis techniques.

Türk dilinde fiillerin semantik özelliklerine göre ele alınması bazı fiiller arasındaki ayrımın belirgin bir biçimde ortaya koyulmasını sağlar. Fiillerde ortak nokta harekettir. Ancak dur-, kalk-, git-,gel-, otur- gibi fiiller fiziksel bir hareketi gösterirken gör-, düşün-, bil-, hatırla-, üzül- gibi fiiller zihinsel bir hareketi gösterir. Buna göre fiiller bildirdikleri hareketin niteliği ya da meydana gelme biçimi açısından farklılığa sahiptir. Fiziksel ve zihinsel olarak iki farklı şekilde meydana gelen hareketleri karşılayan fiillerin, Türk diliyle ilgili sınıflandırma çalışmalarında çoğunlukla “oluş, durum, kılış” gibi genel başlıklar altında değerlendirildiği görülür. Ancak fiziksel bir hareketi yansıtmayan fiillerin ayrıca değerlendirilmesi gerekir. Bu doğrultuda Türkçede son yıllara ait gramer çalışmalarında zihne dayalı gerçekleşen hareketlerin ayrı bir fiil türü olarak “mental fiil” başlığı altında incelendiği görülmektedir. Mental fiillerin ifade ettiği bu hareketler ise zihinsel sürece dayanmaktadır. Bu zihinsel süreç her biri bir sonrakini etkileyen çeşitli aşamalardan meydana gelmektedir. Algılama ile başlayıp zihinsel işlemlerle devam eden ve türlü çıktılar ile son bulan genellikle üç aşamalı olarak değerlendirilen bir süreçtir. Mental süreç içerisindeki bu aşamalar araştırmacılarca benzer şekillerde ifade edilmiş fakat bunların ele alınışında bazı farklılıklar ortaya çıkmıştır. Bu çalışmada Gagauz Türkçesinde tespit edilen mental fiiller için şöyle bir metot uygulanmıştır: 1. Girdi Basamağı Fiilleri (Algı Fiilleri), 2. İşlem Basamağı Fiilleri (Biliş Fiilleri), 3. Çıktı Basamağı Fiilleri (İfade Fiilleri). Çıktı basamağında yer alan ifade fiilleri duygu fiilleri ve açıklama fiilleri olarak ikiye ayrılmıştır. Açıklama fiilleri görsel açıklama fiilleri ve dilsel açıklama fiilleri başlıkları altında ele alınmıştır. Yine diğer ana ve ara başlıklar altında da daha küçük başlıklar oluşturulmuştur. Bu başlıklar içerisindeki mental fiiller bize Gagauz Türklerinin duygu ve düşünce dünyası ile mental süreçteki hareketleri nasıl ifade ettikleri hakkında bilgi verecektir.

In the religious hymns of the New Kingdom (ca. 1539-1077 BC), the Creator deity is said to achieve the cosmogonical deed via a diversity of acts. Among the various lexemes employed to allude to different creative activities, msj plays a significant role, being attested in more than 70 textual instances. Its polysemy covers different meanings, that range from a biological understanding (“to give birth”), to a more manual/crafted-related one (“to fashion”), or simply “to create” (Wb 2, 137.4-138.17). Despite its various nuances, scholars tend to translate this word in modern Western languages using biological terms (such as “enfanter”, “bear”, “give birth”, or “gebären”), even if the majority of the msj-instances in this corpus do not display any birth-related sign, namely, B3, described by Gardiner in his sign-list as “a woman giving birth”, which also carries the phonetic value msj. Moreover, the fact that the Creator is stated to perform a msj-act has been pointed out by some authors as an evidence of the so-called “androgyny” of the Creator deity, especially when msj is jointly mentioned with wtṯ, (“to beget”, “to (pro)create”; Wb. 1, 381.10-382.9).
While some textual instances seem to point to a biological cosmogonical performance (e.g., Copenhagen AEIN 655, 8), others might favour a manual/crafted rendering instead, namely when msj is attested within a phraseological context where semantically related lexemes, such as nbj and ḳd, are also present (e.g., BM EA826, 3; Copenhagen AEIN 897, 1-2). Furthermore, the absence of B3 in specific concurrent writings of msj and wtṯ - graphed with a phallic-sign (D52/D53) - might be understood as a visual/pictorial strategy to undermine a possible non- binary understanding of the Creator deity. A striking example is observed in BM EA 552, where the term is rendered with B3 when individually written but lacks the sign when attested together with wtṯ.
In this paper, I intend to focus on the sign B3 in msj-writings in this corpus and suggest possible interpretations for its absence/presence in selected sources. I shall thus ponder on the semantic implications raised by a visual aspect, more precisely, the (un)importance of a specific sign (classifier/determinative) when interpreting a given word. Particular attention will be paid to topics such as materiality, space availability, script, aesthetic preferences and scribal agency. Therefore, I will argue for a more nuanced and context-based understanding of msj that attends not only to phraseology and intra-textuality, but also to (ortho)graphic features.

"In the context of the emergent Web of Data, a large number of organizations, institutes and companies (e.g., DBpedia, Geonames, PubMed ACM, IEEE, NASA, BBC) adopt the Linked Data practices and publish their data utilizing Semantic Web (SW) technologies. On the other hand, the dominant standard for information exchange in the Web today is XML. Many international standards (e.g., Dublin Core, MPEG-7, METS, TEI, IEEE LOM) have been expressed in XML Schema resulting to a large number of XML datasets. The SW and XML worlds and their developed infrastructures are based on different data models, semantics and query languages. Thus, it is crucial to provide interoperability and integration mechanisms to bridge the gap between the SW and XML worlds.
In this chapter, we give an overview and a comparison of the technologies and the standards adopted by the XML and SW worlds. In addition, we outline the latest efforts from the W3C groups, including the latest working drafts and recommendations (e.g., OWL 2, SPARQL 1.1, XML Schema 1.1). Moreover, we present a survey of the research approaches which aim to provide interoperability and integration between the XML and SW worlds. Finally, we present the SPARQL2XQuery and XS2OWL Frameworks, which bridge the gap and create an interoperable environment between the two worlds. These Frameworks provide mechanisms for: (a) Query translation (SPARQL to XQuery translation); (b) Mapping specification and generation (Ontology to XML Schema mapping); and (c) Schema transformation (XML Schema to OWL transformation)."

In the context of the emergent Web of Data, a large number of organizations, institutes and companies (e.g., DBpedia, Geonames, PubMed ACM, IEEE, NASA, BBC) adopt the Linked Data practices and publish their data utilizing Semantic Web (SW) technologies. On the other hand, the dominant standard for information exchange in the Web today is XML. Many international standards (e.g., Dublin Core, MPEG-7, METS, TEI, IEEE LOM) have been expressed in XML Schema resulting to a large number of XML datasets. The SW and XML worlds and their developed infrastructures are based on different data models, semantics and query languages. Thus, it is crucial to provide interoperability and integration mechanisms to bridge the gap between the SW and XML worlds.