text:
Talk:Preterite

Ladino
I may be missing something here, but I fail to see why Ladino, a language with fewer than 200,000 native speakers and of little historical significance, bears mentioning in this article. Romanian and Catalan are both Romance languages with larger native-speaking populations and, at least in the case of Romanian, historical importance. And yet, both are excluded. I'm deleting it from the article, unless someone can present good reason why it should remain. --The Berzerk Dragon (talk) 12:41, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

-I had wished to protest the test offered by our Dragon brother as preposterous. Upon further consideration, I have little evidence to show that a test merits objection here in Wikipedia, solely by the cause of its intrinsic absurdity. A decision to exclude the Romanian language from the consideration of the preterite case is certainly wrong; regarding Castilian, I would also agree. When confronted in conscience with the nature of Wikipedia and its fondness for politically-correct arbitrariness, I have no reply. Yes! Go ahead and delete whatever you wish! It is the Way!

-However, should reason be applied in this matter, I would argue from the perspective of the nominalist thinkers, that the Italic languages should be seen as a diachronic, timeless flow of expression, gathering into vast lakes at times, and in others, forming little trickling streams as distributaries. It seems a waste of time to assign some sort of value to the alleged 'branches' based upon their merit; even more so, based upon an assumption of merit deriving from the number of "speakers," whatever that word might mean.

-Most small twigs of the Latin children do become extinct, by pressure from a more robust sibling. Ladino disappears under the Spanish effluvium, and its former bed is washed away; many of the Iberian rivulets of the northern Atlantic coast vanish in the southward flood of the Reconquísta. The simple test for the mere number of "native speakers" of one branch of the Latinate languages is intrinsically erroneous; for the numbers of speakers presupposes a certain test for whether a language belongs under the appellation "Spanish." In the Western Hemisphere, the various "Spanishes" are in many ways closer to the more ancient languages - such as Ladino - than to the modern Iberian Spanish. the concept of "New World Spanish" is invoked as a patch to fix the glaring holes exposed by deconstruction of the greater concept, "Spanish."

-I note that I run up against a more serious problem when I express this concern here. It seems that nowadays, in nearly all examples of the handling of conflict in the manipulation of concepts, people positing any disagreement here give rise to the principle of social différance. We lived under an unquestioned axiom that there is a juridical system where all claimants to a dispute have equal merit based on their displeasure. There is no mandate placed upon the disputants to progress towards a dialectical solution; rather, the validity of the argument of each is pre-validated by the solipsistic certainty of the disputant's own logic. Thus, a judge must be created to cobble together a 'certainty' from the dispute, and construct a new, synthetic "common ground" upon which the disputants can "agree."

-Loudness alone, which reflects the disputant's offense and hurt, is the measure of validity of every argument. If the participant is confused, or in the old language, "lies" about certain elements of the dispute, well then, the volume shows the degree of injury of the claimant. Another axiom is that the more profoundly hurt a participant feels, the more likely that participant is to "lie." It is a quaint notion that honesty under adversity is a worthy goal; somehow, that concept must be found reprehensible and tarred with disfavor, being somehow old, European, white, or male, capitalist or some awful property offensive the morals of a free-speaking society. It merits a liberal application of a cleansing tar to rid us of that troublesome concept, á la Harry's lament.

-In practical terms, modern adjudication entails the elimination of any field upon which the disputants war. It defines "common wisdom" or "political correctness" under which the battle cannot be posited. If such peace is purchased by the use of calumny to demerit one or the other combatant, so much the better. "Only a racist would say..." is now a juridical method for discarding argument. It is no longer an appeal to reason, nor a search for further thought, but a revanche against unpleasant disagreement; deconstructionism jammed up backwards deliberately, to make for happiness over disagreement.

-If there were some way to bring that concept into a slogan, it might become the eBanner for Wikipedia. In contrast, if there were a threatening and feared perspective unto discussion in this Web'O'Facts that Wikipedia has become, it would be described as diagreement - the resolution of conflict by the means of resolution of the underlying concepts. "Dia-greement" is admittedly a portmanteau word in English. The ponderous German Durchmeinungsverschiedenheit does not flow trippingly on the tongue, but does state the concept cleanly.

-"Diagreement" is a rather empty concept in the world of logic and dialectics. It merely posits the process of logical thought. It only has merit beyond jargon if there are instances where rational persons cannot use reason.

-So, to loop far back in this discussion, yes, go ahead and delete Ladino for whatever reason soothes you; I shall not dispute it whatsoever. I look upon my writing here as a solipsistic exercise, anyhow, as it is likely to be deleted - even an imbecile can tell that it is politically incorrect and doubleplus ungood. (I add the term 'imbecile' solely to facilitate the process, for that is a politically-incorrect word. Those dispossessed of reason need look no further than such an unwanted glyph.)  We lust for rules, and prefer them when they are arbitrary and irrational; they are thus incontrovertible, and we are comforted thereby.

-Were I to wax indignant about the matter of the Deletion of Ladino, and bring a Dispute before the Powers here, the Judges, I might Win. Umbrage is the opiate of the servile. I could be thereby swelled by self-flattery; I understand the Rules of the Insane and can exercise them energetically. Perhaps others might fear me, knowing the Voice of the Rules. I can defeat by means of magic - hurrah for me!

-Any writing -in Wikipedia or sadly, elsewhere - that seems loose by the standards of the High School Essay (or at least the good ones rightly purchased online) - writing tenuous, flighty, or touching upon concepts that are undeveloped, confusing or demanding of effort to understand - can be best described as "nutty" and "trollish." Incomprehensibility is in the mind of the reader; and one merely needs to seize upon that solitary concept, notwithstanding, to quench a flow of thought. Incomprehensible thoughts might well hide the nugget of seditious concepts - must we mine through EVERYTHING to assure its political correctness? How tedious, NO!

-Let us then be without controversy here, and embrace happiness. Reason, so often, controverts and disturbs Happiness and Will. Thought here in Wikipedia might just as well be termed "Triumph des Glücks;" we need only await the next Leni Riefenstahl to assure us that what we wish, we know is righteous. We simply need an exciting portrayal of our self-assured wisdom. All we need, then, is a Leader; but we are now ready to be led. We lust for Rules; once we are Ruled, we shall be less restive.

-Selah.

(In post-script: Modern habits state that an extensive and critical oration provoked in response to a comment is, comment notwithstanding, an offensive provocation and unmerited retaliation against the person offering the comment.  I see nothing bothersome about what brother Dragon has offered; I see MUCH troublesome about the field of thought upon which such things are considered.  Again, I welcome the deletion of my comments for their violation of the niceness principle, and the central tendency rule.  My assurance here is genuinely to brother Dragon, not to the audience.) Steve (talk) 14:11, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

German
There's a lot of German on this page, I'm not so sure it belongs here. Maybe it would work better if it were suplemented with Spanish and French information also? I think then maybe we would exceed the scope of the article. It might be better if we leave the German/foreign language lesson to Wikibooks. I didn't really want to delete information or change anything without some input from other users. Any comments appreciated. --NitrogenX (Michael Hines) 04:38, 23 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Actually, I didn't see the Spanish there. So maybe some French would be acceptable if anyone knows a bit? --NitrogenX (Michael Hines) 04:49, Feb 23, 2005 (UTC)

 * The preterite is a Germanic grammatical phenomenon. The Latin Imperfect or the French passé simple or its equivalents in other romanic languages are not the same as the preterite.  The preterite simply does not exist in these languages.  The preterite is the default form for telling events in the past (for example in a novel) in English or German.  In French the passé simple is used instead, and in Italian it is the passato remoto, both descendants of the Latin perfect.  It is a fundamental difference between English/German and many other indoeuropean languages, and it is therefore not possible to give examples in non-germanic languages. --GFlohr (talk) 22:16, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
 * That's... not at all true. That Romance languages don't have a separate tense devoted to the preterite does not mean that they have no tense which can also act as preterite. You mention yourself the Latin perfect, which even in Classical Rome was understood and frequently used in such a way which we would now call preterite, or simple past. To claim that there is some concept in some language which is inexpressible in other languages is just plain stupid and elitist. --216.145.71.230 (talk) 02:08, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

forming the preterite in English
How do you form the preterite in English? Do you just add -ed on the end of the infinite for regular verbs? -- Creidieki 15:30, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

 * Yes, though if the infinitive already ends in -e, you don't add another one. Ruakh 21:46, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

 * So where's the section in the article explaining how the preterite tense works in English? (See pluperfect tense for an example.) After reading this article, I still have no idea what the preterite is or how to use it, which is the whole reason I looked it up. -- CWesling 02:21, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

 * I don't know, I think the lead text is pretty clear in explaining that English's preterite is just its simple past tense: came, went, saw, etc. —RuakhTALK 05:07, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

 * Ah. I thought "simple past" was a technical term meaning something different from just "past" tense. I'll see if I can clarify that a little. -- CWesling 01:59, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

 * Oh, I see how that could be confusing. Indeed, "past tense" is probably the most common term for English's preterite. —RuakhTALK 03:06, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Can you clarify then, is the "preterite tense" exactly the same as the "past perfect" aka "pluperfect" tenses? Thanks, Richard

 * No, not at all. —RuakhTALK 18:03, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

 * English, like many other languages, has several past tenses: the imperfect, or past continuous I was walking, the preterite I walked, the perfect (sometimes called present perfect) I have walked and the pluperfect, or past perfect I had walked. The regular form of the past participle is identical to the preterite, but they are different tenses: consider, in the same order of tenses, an irregular verb such as "to eat": I was eating, I ate, I have eaten, I had eaten. Kevin McE 23:03, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

 * You've mostly got the right idea, but you're really mixing terminologies. English has only one past tense, and it's called, straightforwardly enough, the "past tense". Additionally, English has four aspects — neutral (to do), perfect (to have done), continuous (to be doing), and perfect continuous (to have been doing). Verbs in the past tense, regardless of aspect, always include a preterite form: either the preterite of the main verb (did), or the preterite of an auxiliary verb (e.g. had done, was/were doing, had been doing).

 * (The term "preterite" does describe tenses in some other languages, because in some languages there are multiple past tenses, of which exactly one uses the preterite form, so it's natural to refer to that tense as the "preterite"; but that's not the case in English, and in discussing English we draw a fairly strict distinction between the preterite form and the past tense.)

 * —RuakhTALK 05:07, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Such as
"It is similar to the aorist in languages such as Greek." If this is intended to say that Greek is a language, it ought to have a comma: "It is similar to the aorist in languages, such as Greek." But of course, that's absurd. It should read: "It is similar to the aorist in languages like Greek." However, I doubt the preterite actually is like the aorist, which I've heard is difficult to translate into English. I shall suspend judgment until I've learned a bit more about both. :-) Unfree (talk) 01:35, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
 * To the best of my knowledge, the Greek aorist denotes a past action which is finished as opposed to the imperfect, which informs that an action lasted in the past.Kameal (talk) 20:31, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
 * The Aorist in greek is not like the preterite.  I am removing this reference because it is unfactual.  If anyone can bring up a scholarly source that states that the aorist is like the preterite, they can find the source for the removed sentence here : It is similar to the aorist in languages such as Greek.
 * I myself have found a scholarly paper that stated Is the aorist subjunctive a past tense? "No," answers Apollonius Dyscolus, in the first syntax produced in the Western world, " for the time relation belonging to the indicative disappears as soon as we change the indicative to another mood." It can be found here.  http://www.archive.org/stream/greekaorist00belluoft/greekaorist00belluoft_djvu.txt  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.212.106.138 (talk) 20:52, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Latin is being treated here as a Romance language
actually being an Italic language. Kameal (talk) 20:31, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Italian comes from latin, so it is not an Italic language. All romance languages (Italian, Romanian, French, Spanish and Portuguese) come from latin. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.219.78.106 (talk) 00:25, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

Shift to Preterite from Present Perfect in Western Hemisphere (Spanish / English)
''As a speaker of Spanish and English, and having visited most of the locales mentioned, I really do not perceive the changes mentioned in the last paragraph. As I read the paragraph, it somehow implies that it is more common in Ireland to say "I ate the egg" than "I have eaten the egg," even if the speaker just finished breakfast. Similarly, in American Spanish, one would supposedly be more likely to say "Comí el huevo" after breakfast. I just don't find either to be the case. The present perfect is still more natural, even for Americans or Irish. And I do not think the meaning is any different on either side of the ocean in either language.'' —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.171.100.224 (talk) 05:24, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

Merger proposal
I propose this be merged with Past historical. Past historical is a stub, while preterite is more fully developed. More importantly, the two terms mean the same thing - the intro to preterite states "The preterite (also [...] past historic)". I see no distinction between the two, but I only understand the preterite in one language other than English, so it's possible I'm wrong. Bsimmons 666  (talk) 03:31, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Commented out German section
Hello authors. I have commented this section out:

In certain regions, a few specific verbs are used in the preterite, for instance the modal verbs, and the verbs haben (have) and sein (be).
 * Es gab einmal ein kleines Mädchen, das Rotkäppchen hieß. (There was once a small girl who was called Little Red Riding Hood.)

I'm far from being fluent in German language, but as far as I know, "es gab" is simply the past (praterite) for of "es gibt". I cannot see what is specific about it -- if there's no perfect version of it (being the equivalent of "there has been"), then please elaborate on it.

Right now it's simply not clear enough what the author meant.

LMB (talk) 12:37, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

 * These verbs are used in the preterite tense even in everyday speech, while other verbs are not. E.g., it would be very rare to hear the phrase "ich ging" (I went), with the form "ich bin gegangen" far more common in spoken German, while phrases with the verbs mentioned such as "ich hatte" or "es gab" are far more common than their perfect forms. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 143.167.236.161 (talk) 22:17, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
 * I have removed the section you have commented out. It's completely nonsensical – the example sentence is Standard German, not something pertaining to "certain regions". It contains neither "haben", "sein", nor a modal verb. It is a perfectly ordinary example of the Präteritum. --ἀνυπόδητος (talk) 18:18, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
 * What the author meant (and I inadvertently put in something of the same kind) was this: While the imperfect (it's the name we learnt in school) somewhat fades out of use (though I wouldn't have been sure about this in Middle German regions), it is obviously kept alive in some cases without even making the intention to fade. This is (unfortunately for learners?) the case with strong verbs (the name speaks for itself), that is, irregular verbs (ich war in any cases, ich hatte in Standard German, though the Bavarian dialect always uses perfect) except those which, while irregular, still form the regular ending (es brannte etc.; ich konnte being the exception) - are they felt still too weak? -, plus one regular modal verb (ich wollte). In addition, the imperfect seems to be tending really to become an imperfect, not sure whether only in Upper German regions or altogether. "Ich war gerade mit dem Antrag beschäftigt, als die Pause gewesen ist." (I was being occupied with the petition, when there was the break.") Thus, even here in Bavaria I'd not be so surprised when somebody in everyday conversation said: "Wir buken gerade noch den Kuchen, als der erste Gast eingetroffen ist", we were still baking the cake when the first guest arrived, although it would be a "Standardgermanism" certainly, and in this case even with a word that the Duden lists as archaic (buken). However I would certainly be surprised if somebody used the Duden's alternative backten (which to my ears never has become German). And to begin a fairytale with Es gab einmal is style-breaking, even if the Brothers Grimm may have done so themselves. It must, of course, be Es war einmal. --77.4.41.227 (talk) 14:03, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
 * And one other regular modal verb (ich sollte). --93.133.195.55 (talk) 23:47, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

about the German "preterite"
Hi. I added a "disputed-section" tag to the section on German. I did this because I wonder about the correctness of the assertion that "North German colloquial" has a distinction between preterite and perfect that is similar to English. There are no citations in this section and this is not at all what my German grammars say. My grammars explicitly assert that the German perfect is not the equivalent of the English perfect, but rather that the preterite is used only for connected past narratives and the perfect for other situations. I understand that Low German colloquial speech has an English-like perfect vs. preterite distinction, and that "High German colloquial" (i.e. the colloquial speech where High German was originally native) doesn't have this distinction, but it's far from obvious that northerners when speaking Standard ("High") German use the perfect like English. I really need to see citations. Benwing (talk) 07:59, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

 * How advanced are you grammars? Do they contain such detailed information on dialects?  If these are general grammars you are referring to then you should understand that they are general and not going to provide such detail.  The absence of that detail does not invalidate what has been noted here.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.74.101.73 (talk) 20:02, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

 * All my German language teachers have also mentioned that the Preteritum is used in spoken German a lot more in the north. However an authoritative reference would not be out of place here. La-pays (talk) 12:42, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

 * I have rewritten the section according to the Duden Grammar, which matches my intuition. I was going to include the following statement,
 * Despite the similartity, the Perfekt does not directly correspond to the English persent perfect. While it is incorrect to say **It has rained yesterday, the formal German equivalent Es hat gestern geregnet is perfectly grammatical.
 * but I'm not sure whether this is true for Northern German (it certainly is for Upper German) and I can't source it. Could you remove the Disputed tag if you are satisfied with my changes? --ἀνυπόδητος (talk) 18:14, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

Dubious
I have tagged as "dubious" the following assertion:
 * Coincidentally, British Mainland English present perfect forms are sometimes replaced with simple pasts by Irish and North American English speakers, an exactly parallel development.

It is not possible, in North American English, to replace I have been to Russia with I went to Russia, which is the suggestion that seems to be implicit here.

I think what's going on is that, in UK English, the present perfect is obligatory in combination with words that indicate recentness, such as just or already. For example, in US English it is possible to say I just ate, whereas in the UK it would have to be I've just eaten. But in US English, it is possible to use I just ate distinctively from I've just eaten (depending on whether the speaker is relating the action taken as a whole, versus a present state of presumable fullness). The extent to which this is actually done, I won't attempt to say, but the situation is more complicated than a simple replacement of the present perfect by the simple past. --Trovatore (talk) 01:55, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

 * What they mean is that many people say "I have went to Russia". Still a perfect, but the past participial form of the verb has been replaced with the past. A huge percentage of the population have only two basic verb forms rather than three. — kwami (talk) 03:43, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
 * “I have went to Russia” (while substandard) is not the preterit. The claim here is that “present perfect forms” are replaced with “simple pasts” (not participles with simple past forms, but present perfect forms).  The present perfect and the preterit are not interchangeable and the present perfect isn't going anywhere in AmE.  As for simple past forms uniformly supplanting past participles (a completely different and unrelated issue), citation needed.  While I know plenty of speakers that do supplant past participles with the simple past form, it's only with some verbs.  For some verbs, the opposite is more common:  “I have went” is no more common in Appalachia than “I seen” but while some dialects do that, it's not characteristic of AmE overall. mcornelius (talk) 23:19, 22 January 2012 (UTC)
 * In the US or in Ireland? I have went to Russia is definitely considered substandard in the US.  In any case it doesn't fit the text, which talks about the present perfect being replaced by the simple past, not by some third construction. --Trovatore (talk) 03:51, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
 * In the US. You're right, it doesn't fit the context. But being considered substandard is irrelevant: it's reality. (Presumably the Canary Isl. thing is also considered substandard.) — kwami (talk) 05:58, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
 * My vague impression, though, is that the present perfect really is disappearing from Mexican Spanish. I could be wrong, but I don't see it much when I look at their newspapers.  In American English, on the other hand, it is in no danger whatsoever; the line of demarcation is just in a different place from the one in British English. --Trovatore (talk) 10:30, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

Idiotic
This article is useless and defeating for any English speaker trying to find out what a preterite is. I am restraining myself from using vulgar language. This is truly an abuse of power by some WP administrator. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dynasteria (talk • contribs) 23:54, 24 December 2015 (UTC)

German section
There are some incorrect claims in the section on the German preterite because of a confusion of different phenomena as well as different varieties/registers.

The first paragraph is mostly fine, although it is not stated what is meant by "originally". However, the second paragraph mixes different things. The claim that "in modern German, however, these tenses no longer reflect any distinction in aspect" is certainly not correct when speaking about (especially formal or literary) written modern German. In fact, the distinction between Präteritum and Perfekt is still more or less one between how the event is related to the present. Although the distinction is not exactly the same as in English, possibly less clear (such that there are more cases where both forms are acceptable), and more dependent on register/style, these tenses are not freely interchangeable. What is probably meant is that there is no distinction between progressive and non-progressive aspect, but such a distinction never existed for written German. The lack of a present progressive tense is not relevant here either. (Actually, I have the intuition that in the spoken language (!) at least some speakers use Präteritum and Perfekt to distinguish what would be past progressive and simple past in English, especially with some frequent verbs, but I cannot give a valid source.) As for the statement that the preterite is mostly a narrative tense, this is correct (and in fact contradicts the claim that there is no distinction in aspect anymore), although the preterite is also used to describe states of longer duration that are not part of a connected action (such as in "Vor 500 Millionen Jahren enthielt die Erdatmosphäre keinen Sauerstoff" ("500 million years ago, the earth's atmosphere did not contain any oxygen").

The section on Upper German is correct and precise, but it cannot be introduced by "for example" since it does not illustrate what was said before about: What is said about Upper German does not hold for modern German in general, since it only refers to the spoken language and informal writing of a particular region. Furthermore, in the Upper German dialects the Perfekt is used as a general past tense for several hundred years now, thus including varieties that are probably not meant by "modern German".

Furthermore, the reference [5] is in the wrong place, since it apparently describes the use of the tenses in Upper German.

Thus, I'd suggest to rewrite the second paragraph into something like "In modern German, the use of Präteritum and Perfekt does not exactly correspond to that between the English preterite and perfect tense, and depends on the variety and the register. The Präteritum typically has the meaning of a narrative tense, i.e. a tense used primarily for describing connected past actions (e.g. as part of a story), and is used most often in formal writing and in literature, while the Perfekt is more common in spoken language as well as informal writing.", and to remove "for example" from the beginning of the third paragraph. --2001:16B8:2B64:D300:B1F8:E3A5:81C0:BC01 (talk) 12:37, 15 October 2021 (UTC)

title: Talk:Preterite


text:
File:BrushfireFairytales.jpg

Summary
The album cover for Jack Johnson's Brushfire Fairytales.

Fair Use Rationale

 * The image is low resolution.
 * Copies could not be used to make illegal copies of the album artwork on another CD;
 * No free equivalent is available or could be created that would adequately give the same information.
 * The image does not replace the original market role of the CD.
 * Its use here does not limit the copyright owner's rights to sell the CD in any way.
 * The image has previously been published and is freely available elsewhere on the internet.
 * The image meets general Wikipedia content requirements.
 * The image contributes significantly to the article by illustrating the subject of the article.
 * The image is significant because it was made by a famous artist, Jack Johnson.

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: File:BrushfireFairytales.jpg


text:
Charles Brenton Huggins

Charles Brenton Huggins (September 22, 1901 – January 12, 1997) was a Canadian-American surgeon and physiologist known for his work on prostate function, prostate cancer, and breast cancer. Born in Halifax in 1901, Huggins moved to the United States for medical school. He was one of the founding staff members of the University of Chicago Medical School, where he remained for the duration of his professional research career. Huggins' work on how sex hormones influence prostate function ultimately led to his discovery of hormone therapies to treat prostate cancer. For this finding, he was awarded the 1966 Nobel Prize for Physiology or Medicine. In addition to his work on prostate cancer, Huggins explored the relationship between hormones and breast cancer, developed an animal model for breast cancer, and developed "chromogenic substrate"s that are widely used for biochemical analyses. Huggins continued to perform research into his 90s; he died in Chicago in 1997.

Early life and education
Charles Brenton Huggins was born September 22nd, 1901 in Halifax, Nova Scotia to Charles E. Huggins and Bessie Maria Spencer. At 19, he graduated from Acadia University with a BA degree, supplementing his Acadia coursework with summer courses in physical and organic chemistry at Columbia University. Huggins went on to Harvard Medical School, and received his MD degree in 1924. He served his internship and residency in general surgery with Frederick A. Coller at the University of Michigan. While at Michigan, Huggins met operating room nurse Margaret Wellman; they married in 1927.

Academic career
In 1927, Huggins was recruited to the new University of Chicago Medical School by chairman of surgery Dallas Phemister. As one of the eight original staff members of the school, Huggins was assigned the urology department, and had to rapidly teach himself the specialty. In 1931, Phemister offered Huggins a paid research sabbatical in Europe; Huggins spent several months at London's Lister Institute working in Robert Robison's lab to deepen his knowledge in biochemistry. He was promoted to associate professor in 1933, and full professor in 1936.

In 1951, businessman and longtime financial supporter of Huggins' research Ben E. May endowed the Ben May Laboratory for Cancer Research at the University of Chicago. Huggins eventually became the May Laboratory's director, serving in the position until 1969. In 1962, he was granted an endowed professorship, the William B. Ogden Distinguished Service Professor.

Notable students of Professor Huggins included Howard Guy Williams-Ashman, Shutsung Liao, Paul Talalay and A. Hari Reddi.

Research
A plaque in Professor's Huggins office carried his motto: "Discovery is our business." This motto signified his ethos to research and medical discovery.

Huggins' early research work focused on bone physiology. However, he eventually felt this bone work was unlikely to lead to medical progress, and set it aside in favor of studying the male urogenital tract. Through the 1930s, Huggins published work characterizing the constituents of semen and which organ (seminal vesicles or prostate) they derive from. In 1939, Huggins described a method for isolating prostate fluid from dogs, which served as the foundation for much of his subsequent work. He showed that the prostate requires androgens (male sex hormones) in order to function, and that androgen treatment could be counteracted by treatment with estrogens. In the course of this work, he discovered that older dogs tended to have enlarged prostates, and that these enlarged prostates could be shrunk by administering estrogen.

In 1940 and 1941, Huggins – along with students Clarence V. Hodges and William Wallace Scott – published a series of three papers detailing his most famous finding: that counteracting androgen activity by orchiectomy (surgical removal of the testicles) or estrogen treatment shrunk tumors in many men with metastatic prostate cancer. These men experienced dramatic pain relief within days of the treatment; four of the original 21 treated went on to survive more than 12 years from the original treatment.

Huggins' work on prostate cancer often necessitated measuring the amount of prostate-derived enzymes in the blood. To this end, Huggins developed colorimetric methods for quantifying the concentration of various phosphatases, glucuronidases, and esterases. These assays relied on "chromogenic substrates" (substances that change color in response to a given enzyme), a term Huggins coined, and a concept he pioneered.

In the 1950s, Huggins went on to show an analogous relationship between sex hormones and breast cancer – tumor growth was stimulated by estrogens, and slowed by androgens. At the time breast cancer research was hindered by the lack of an animal model. Huggins described the first reliable model: 7,12-dimethylbenz(a)anthracene administered orally to rats, 100% of which rapidly developed breast tumors; the model is now called "Huggins Tumor". Around this time, Huggins wound down his surgical practice, turning his attention to full-time scientific research.

Altogether, Huggins published over 200 peer-reviewed papers describing his research.

Honors
Huggins was elected to the United States National Academy of Sciences and the American Academy of Arts and Sciences in 1949. In 1962, he was elected to the American Philosophical Society, and was awarded the Lasker Award the following year. In 1966, following nominations from noted surgeon J. Hartwell Harrison as well as Nobel laureates Otto H. Warburg, William P. Murphy, and Albert Szent-Györgyi, Huggins was awarded the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine "for his discoveries concerning hormonal treatment of prostatic cancer". From 1972–1979, Huggins was named the ceremonial chancellor of his alma mater, Acadia University. His prize, shared with fellow cancer researcher Peyton Rous, was just the second Nobel for cancer treatment or research.

Personal life
Huggins and his wife Margaret had a son and a daughter. His son, Charles E. Huggins, was also a surgeon, and directed the Massachusetts General Hospital blood bank until his death in 1990. Margaret Huggins died in 1983. Huggins devoted much of his time to laboratory work, logging long hours in the lab, and continuing to perform hands-on laboratory work in his 90s. Huggins died on January 12, 1997, in Chicago, Illinois, aged 95.

title: Charles Brenton Huggins


text: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Comics/Superherobox instructions


text:
Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Comics/Superherobox example

Property Rights?
I'd like to know if a "Property Rights" or similar could be added to "Publication information" area. Twillisjr (talk) 15:24, 11 November 2014 (UTC)


text:
Michio Morishima

Michio Morishima (森嶋 通夫) was a Japanese heterodox economist and public intellectual who was the Sir John Hicks Professor of Economics at the London School of Economics from 1970 to 1988. He was also professor at Osaka University and member of the British Academy. In 1976 he won the Order of Culture (文化勲章, Bunka-kunshō).

Career
Originally desiring a career as a historical novelist, at the university Morishima pursued social science, studying both economics and sociology under Yasuma Takada. At Kyoto University, Morishima was rigorously trained in both mainstream neoclassical economic theory and Marxian economics. Mathematically gifted, in 1946, he graduated from Kyoto University and taught there in addition to Osaka University. He started Institute of Social and Economic Research (ISER) of Osaka University with Yasuma Takada.

In 1960 he established with Nobel-laureate Lawrence R. Klein from the Economics Department of the University of Pennsylvania the International Economic Review (today published by Penn), which grew to become one of the leading journals in economics in the world.

In 1965, he became the first Japanese president of the Econometric Society. By all accounts, John Hicks was a committed advocate of Morishima's careership in England.

In 1968, he immigrated to Britain, teaching at University of Essex, then accepting an endowed chair at the LSE in 1970.

Later, he started the project that led to the establishment of the Suntory-Toyota Foundation and the Suntory and Toyota International Centres for Economic and Related Disciplines (STICERD) at LSE. He was STICERD's first chairman. In 1991 he was elected Honorary Fellow of the LSE.

Contributions
Morishima's three-volume work reinterpreting and synthesizing economic ideas in the major writings of David Ricardo, Karl Marx, and Léon Walras, now largely forgotten, represents one of the high points of the radical political economy of the 1970s New Left in North America. His intense interest in general equilibrium theory, classical political economy, and capitalism drove this work. Based on LSE lectures, these books worked towards the accommodation of von Neumann's 1937 multi-sectoral growth model to a general equilibrium model. Considering the work of these theorists to be Ricardian, his three books worked to show that the modification of them along von Neumann lines elucidates the theoretical similarities and differences between the positions.

Academic positions

 * 1948 – Assistant at Kyoto University
 * 1950 – Lecturer at Kyoto University
 * 1950 – Assistant professor at Kyoto University
 * 1951 – Associate professor at Osaka University
 * 1963 – Professor of Economics at Osaka University
 * 1966 – Professor of ISER (Institute of Social and Economic *Research) at Osaka University
 * 1968 – Visiting professor at University of Essex
 * 1969 – Keynes visiting professor at University of Essex
 * 1970 – Professor at London School of Economics
 * 1982 – Sir John Hicks professor at London School of Economics

Publications

 * Morishima, Michio (1952), "On the Laws of Change of the Price System in an Economy which Contains Complementary Goods", Osaka EP.
 * Morishima, Michio (1952), "Consumer Behavior and Liquidity Preference", Econometrica.
 * Morishima, Michio (1956), "An Analysis of the Capitalist Process of Reproduction", Metroeconomica.
 * Morishima, Michio (1957), "Notes on the Theory of Stability of Multiple Exchange", RES.
 * Morishima, Michio (1958), "A Contribution to the Non-Linear Theory of the Trade Cycle", ZfN.
 * Morishima, Michio (1958), "A Dynamic Analysis of Structural Change in a Leontief Model", Economica.
 * Morishima, Michio (1958), "Prices Interest and Profits in a Dynamic Leontief System", Econometrica.
 * Morishima, Michio (1959), "Some Properties of a Dynamic Leontief System with a Spectrum of Techniques", Econometrica.
 * Morishima, Michio (1960), "Existence of Solution to the Walrasian System of Capital Formation and Credit", ZfN.
 * Morishima, Michio (1960), "On the Three Hicksian Laws of Comparative Statics", RES.
 * Morishima, Michio (1960), "Economic Expansion and the Interest Rate in Generalized von Neumann Models", Econometrica.
 * Morishima, Michio (1961), "Proof of a Turnpike Theorem: The `No Joint Production' Case", RES.
 * Morishima, Michio (1961), "Generalizations of the Frobenius-Wielandt Theorems for Non- Negative Square Matrices", J of London Mathematical Society.
 * Morishima, Michio (1962), "The Stability of Exchange Equilibrium: An alternative approach", IER.
 * Morishima, Michio (1964), Equilibrium, Stability and Growth: A multi-sectoral analysis.
 * Morishima, Michio (1966), "A Refutation of the Non-Switching Theorem", QJE.
 * Morishima, Michio (1967), "A Few Suggestions on the Theory of Elasticity", Keizai Hyoron
 * Morishima, Michio (1969), Theory of Economic Growth.
 * Morishima, Michio (1970), "A Generalization of the Gross Substitute System", RES.
 * Morishima, Michio (1971), "Consumption-Investment Frontier, Wage-Profit Frontier and the von Neumann Growth Equilibrium", ZfN.
 * Morishima, Michio (1972), The Working of Econometric Models, (in collaboration with Y. Murata, T. Nosse and M. Saito).
 * Morishima, Michio (1973), Marx's Economics: A dual theory of value and growth. Cambridge.
 * Morishima, Michio (1973), Theory of Demand: Real and monetary, with co-authors.
 * Morishima, Michio (1973), The Economic Theory of Modern Society.
 * Morishima, Michio (1974), "The Frobenius Theorem, Its Solow-Samuelson Extension and the Kuhn-Tucker Theorem", with T. Fujimoto, JMathE.
 * Morishima, Michio (1977), Walras's Economics: A pure theory of capital and money.
 * Morishima, Michio (1978), "The Cournot-Walras Arbitrage Resource Consuming Exchange and Competitive Equilibrium", with M. Majumdar, in Hommage a Francois Perroux.
 * Morishima, Michio (1982),Why Has Japan Succeeded? Western technology and the Japanese ethos.
 * Morishima, Michio (1984), "The Good and Bad Uses of Mathematics", in Wiles and Routh, editors, Economics in Disarray.
 * Morishima, Michio (1984), The Economics of Industrial Society.
 * Morishima, Michio (1989), Ricardo's Economics.
 * Morishima, Michio (1991), "General Equilibrium Theory in the 21st Century", EJ.
 * Morishima, Michio (1992), Capital and Credit: A new formulation of general equilibrium theory.
 * Morishima, Michio (1994), "Capital and Growth", in Homouda, The Legacy of Hicks.
 * Morishima, Michio (1996), Dynamic Economic Theory.
 * Morishima, Michio (1999), Why do I expect Japan to collapse? In Freedman, Craig, (ed.) Why Did Japan Stumble?: Causes and Cures. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, UK, pp. 25–73. ISBN 9781858988344
 * Morishima, Michio (1992), Capital and Credit: A new formulation of general equilibrium theory.
 * Morishima, Michio (1994), "Capital and Growth", in Homouda, The Legacy of Hicks.
 * Morishima, Michio (1996), Dynamic Economic Theory.
 * Morishima, Michio (1999), Why do I expect Japan to collapse? In Freedman, Craig, (ed.) Why Did Japan Stumble?: Causes and Cures. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, UK, pp. 25–73. ISBN 9781858988344

title: Michio Morishima


text:
Talk:Balthus

Biographies
"Biographers rushed into print shortly after his death, and their work has since been severely and widely criticised as being unreasonable and confused."

This is a rather sweeping statement with no sources. Which biographies? and by whom?

The statements refers to Nicholas Weber's biography of the artist, i think. Anchorite 21:06, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

--Biographers means plural. Fox Weber is only one. Also there's no back up or reference for who did the "severe" and "wide" criticism. This statement surely should be removed.

--I've  removed this line.

Too bad. If you ever followed overall criticism of the biographies that came out immediately after Balthus' death, you'd see they were indeed severely criticized, especially the one by Weber. Who did that? NY Times, for one, and many other leading publications. Should we dig out sources to defend the statement? - sure, why not. Is it really worth it? No. Anchorite 14:19, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

The Weber biography was published several years before Balthus died, in 1999. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Katharine Weber (talk • contribs) 04:38, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

Illustrations
Since the article discusses The Guitar Lesson should not the painting be part of the article? Haiduc 04:43, 23 Feb 2005 (UTC)

 * I think so, a picture is definitely worth a thousand circumlocutary words here in explaining the tension between eroticism, discomfort, and reference. However, adding it will certainly be controversial.  Should we seek guidance first? Subsolar 08:15, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Ancestral Debates
The section quotes extensively from Weber's book, and basically repeats the authors assertions, which are not really relevant to the person of Balthus, but more so to the person of author, Nicholas Weber. When you read the book, you notice that the author has fallen out with Balthus on the personal level pretty much soon after gaining private access to the artist. The remainder of the book was written without consent, permission, or collaboration with the artist. Weber makes numerous mistakes about Eastern European geography, genealogy, and heraldry as it pertains to the ancestral debates. I'd be extremely cautious quoting ANYTHING that he ascribes to Balthus, as Balthus' real words. Anchorite 14:30, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

 * Given this, I have removed the "French Jews" and "Polish Jews" categories. —Ashley Y 08:24, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

 * The Jewish controversy is a minor issue, at most, and a non-issue in the opinion of many. It does not merit an entire section that is longer than most of those describing Balthus's work. I recommend severe pruning, and relocation of relevant material to Early life. Sam Weller (talk) 15:17, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

On name change
Is there any advantage moving article name from Balthus to Balthasar Kłossowski de Rola when the artist was and remains known internationally as Balthus? You'll rarely find anyone typing Jean-Baptiste Poquelin in a search for Molière, for example. Jumbolino (talk) 23:37, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

 * "Balthus" better satisfies WP:NAMEPEOPLE. This move probably should not have been done without discussion; I've moved it back. Ewulp (talk) 02:45, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

 * I agree with keeping Balthus as the article, and redirecting to it. But there is no reason to move the talkpage also. A redirect article should retain its own talkpage, for possible future discussion of the best redirect target, and any other matters (development of disambiguation pages, etc.). Accordingly, I have removed the redirect from Talk:Balthasar Kłossowski de Rola. I have also removed double redirects from Balthasar Klossowski de Rola, and another one. They now redirect straight to Balthus. And I have made redirects from Klossowski de Rola, etc.
 * – ⊥ ¡ɐɔıʇǝo  N  oetica! T– 03:45, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

 * Thanks! You're right about the talk page. Ewulp (talk) 04:40, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Why is every artist and musician on the planet attributed with Jewish ancestry? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pezzos (talk • contribs) 04:22, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Antoinette de Watteville
What happened to her? Did she die? Did they get divorced? Was bigamy allowed in Switzerland back then? The article simply mentions Balthus married Antoinette de Watteville, and then, a few paragraphs later, that he had a 'second wife.' The meaning is ambiguous. Dbutler1986 (talk) 04:00, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

C-Class
As it stands, the quality of this article is nearer C-Class than B-Class (too much still remains confused, poorly organised, superficial, and riddled with biased and unsourced personal research behind it). That said, I admire those editors who've contributed their time and research (objective) to building up this article on a fascinating and important painter. May they continue to do so. --Jumbolino (talk) 13:04, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

B-class review
For WP:POLAND: failed due to insufficient inline cites. See also comments by Jumbolino above. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 10:41, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

Polish-French?
He was not born in Poland. He was born in France to Polish parents, and the article doesn't mention any significant connection to Poland, other than an unreferenced claim he was really fond of his Polish family coat of arms. I have serious doubts this justifies calling him Polish-French. Pl wikipedia just calls him a French artist. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 10:45, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

Pedophilia lacuna
Since the pedophilia issue is the one most commonly associated, at least in the popular mind, with Balthus, it is strange to find so little discussion of it here. The article appears to be more or less a paste from The Art and Popular Culture Encyclopedia, the original of which, however, rightly includes the issue in its introduction. Consider:"Today, there is no question that Balthus was a pedophile.” - Christian Viveros-Faune Village Voice Oct 16, 2013  http://www.villagevoice.com/arts/ol-dirty-master-the-discomforts-of-balthus-7184300  Orthotox (talk) 01:30, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

Seriously. "Erotically charged paintings of pubescent girls"? I tried to changed the first two words to "pedophilic," but I got blocked by a filter telling me my change was "unhelpful." I seriously have to wonder about the motivations of the creators/editors/maintainers of this page. Given the seriousness of child sexual abuse, I am not amenable to being dismissed as "violating good faith" on this subject. VasyaPetrovna (talk) 12:20, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

 * Even if he wasn't creepy, it does feel very abusive in that Anna was 8, Therese was 11, they may not have wanted to be painted in these poses, (even if it is interpreted that the pose is innocently done by the character in the painting, the artist seems to have designed it to invite voyeurism, and anyway Balthus says the paintings are about child sexuality, although he also said they were innocent) or even if they did want to pose they might not have been aware of the implications being forever associated with these infamous paintings. It feels like forcing sexuality onto them. Would he have painted prepubescent boys like this? Also, if the poses done by the characters are meant to be consciously erotic, it feels uncomfortable that an adult male artist wants to contemplate juvenile female sexual awakening to the extent of painting it lots of times, with real child models, and inviting adult viewers to look. Can links be added discussing these issues? And I think his child models were interviewed - if they didn't mind and didn't feel he was creepy that puts a different light on it. It still feels wrong as they couldn't fully understand the ramifications, (and why did their parents agree?), but if he was a creep they would probably have sensed it, although maybe not. 92.40.9.136 (talk) 17:17, 29 July 2022 (UTC)
 * It seems ridiculous that I have to write 'creepy' and can't just use the 'P' word, but that's disruptive editing rules! 92.40.9.136 (talk) 17:18, 29 July 2022 (UTC)
 * I've got a bit more info on the model for The Guitar Lesson. One source says it was Laurence Bataille, 17 at the time, daughter of Sylvia Bataille the actress. Another source says it was the daughter of a janitor from a poor neighbourhod, that she didn't want to pose half nude but did it so her mother could have some money, and that her mother was present the whole time. These stories conflict a lot, and which one is true really affects how we judge Balthus. Another fact is that Therese Blanchard died at only 25. Do we know why? 188.28.243.4 (talk) 19:47, 29 July 2022 (UTC)

Verifying Quotes by Balthus
Can anyone specialising in art literature please verify the following quotations from interviews by Balthus, and perhaps put them in chronological order? They seem very likely to be by Balthus, but there is no original source in easy view to the public. "I refuse to confide and don't like it when people write about art." "One must always draw, draw with the eyes, when one cannot draw with a pencil." "Painting is the passage from the chaos of the emotions to the order of the possible." "I always feel the desire to look for the extraordinary in ordinary things; to suggest, not to impose, to leave always a slight touch of mystery in my paintings." "Painting is a source of endless pleasure, but also of great anguish." "Painting is a language which cannot be replaced by another language. I don't know what to say about what I paint, really." "Painting what I experience, translating what I feel, is like a great liberation. But it is also work, self-examination, consciousness, criticism, struggle." "I will always find even the worst paintings that attempt some kind of representation better than the best invented paintings."

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the. —Community Tech bot (talk) 00:57, 26 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Oliver Mark - Balthus, Rossinière 2000 (1).jpg

Exhibitions
It is stated in the Exibitions section that :

"Musée d'Art Moderne de la Ville de Paris (1984, traveled to Metropolitan Museum, Kyoto); Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York (1984); and Palazzo Grassi, Venice (2001)."

The original exhibition was not at the MAM-VP but at the Musée National d'Art Moderne, in its Centre national d'art et de culture Georges-Pompidou, aka Centre Beaubourg, exhibition space on the fifth floor. The exhibition took place from November 5th, 1983 to January 23rd, 1984. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yar zadeg (talk • contribs) 10:05, 2 November 2020 (UTC)

The Guitar Girl - Balthus
I am nominating the image of of the painting The Guitar Girl for deletion. 82.11.161.233 (talk) 04:14, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

title: Talk:Balthus


text: User talk:70.58.156.86

title: User talk:70.58.156.86


text:
User:Rkv

Hi my name is Roshan.K.V

livin in the US Born in india i speak hindi(&write),tamil,malayam,kannada(&write), english. if u need my help translating just pm me.

title: User:Rkv


text:
Parity anomaly

In theoretical physics a quantum field theory is said to have a parity anomaly if its classical action is invariant under a change of parity of the universe, but the quantum theory is not invariant.

This kind of anomaly can occur in odd-dimensional gauge theories with fermions whose gauge groups have odd dual Coxeter numbers. They were first introduced by Antti J. Niemi and Gordon Walter Semenoff in the letter Axial-Anomaly-Induced Fermion Fractionization and Effective Gauge-Theory Actions in Odd-Dimensional Space-Times  and by A. Norman Redlich in the letter Gauge Noninvariance and Parity Nonconservation of Three-Dimensional Fermions and the article Parity violation and gauge noninvariance of the effective gauge field action in three dimensions. It is in some sense an odd-dimensional version of Edward Witten's SU(2) anomaly in 4-dimensions, and in fact Redlich writes that his demonstration follows Witten's.

The anomaly in 3-dimensions
Consider a classically parity-invariant gauge theory whose gauge group G has dual Coxeter number h in 3-dimensions. Include n Majorana fermions which transform under a real representation of G. This theory naively suffers from an ultraviolet divergence. If one includes a gauge-invariant regulator then the quantum parity invariance of the theory will be broken if h and n are odd.

The anomaly can only be a choice of sign
Consider for example Pauli–Villars regularization. One needs to add n massive Majorana fermions with opposite statistics and take their masses to infinity. The complication arises from the fact that the 3-dimensional Majorana mass term, $$m\overline{\psi}\psi$$ is not parity invariant, therefore the possibility exists that the violation of parity invariance may remain when the mass goes to infinity. Indeed, this is the source of the anomaly.

If n is even, then one may rewrite the n Majorana fermions as n/2 Dirac fermions. These have parity invariant mass terms, and so Pauli–Villars may be used to regulate the divergences and no parity anomaly arises. Therefore, for even n there is no anomaly. Moreover, as the contribution of 2n Majorana fermions to the partition function is the square of the contribution of n fermions, the square of the contribution to the anomaly of n fermions must be equal to one. Therefore, the anomalous phase may only be equal to a square root of one, in other words, plus or minus one. If it is equal to one, then there is no anomaly. Therefore, the question is, when is there an ambiguity in the partition function of a factor of -1.

Anomaly from the index theorem
We want to know when the choice of sign of the partition function is ill-defined. The possibility that it be ill-defined exists because the action contains the fermion kinetic term

$$i\overline{\psi}(\partial_\mu+A_\mu)\Gamma^\mu\psi$$

where ψ is a Majorana fermion and A is the vector potential. In the path integral, the exponential of the action is integrated over all of the fields. When integrating the above term over the fermion fields one obtains a factor of the square root of the determinant of the Dirac operator for each of the n Majorana fermions.

As is usual with a square root, one needs to determine its sign. The overall phase of the partition function is not an observable in quantum mechanics, and so for a given configuration this sign choice can be made arbitrarily. But one needs to check that the sign choice is consistent. To do this, let us deform the configuration through the configuration space, on a path which eventually returns to the original configuration. If the sign choice was consistent then, having returned to the original configuration, one will have the original sign. This is what needs to be checked.

The original spacetime is 3-dimensional, call the space M. Now we are considering a circle in configuration space, which is the same thing as a single configuration on the space $$M\times S^1$$. To find out the number of times that the sign of the square root vanishes as one goes around the circle, it suffices to count the number of zeroes of the determinant on $$M\times S^1$$, because each time that a pair of eigenvalues changes sign there will be a zero. Notice that the eigenvalues come in pairs, as discussed for example in Supersymmetric Index Of Three-Dimensional Gauge Theory, and so whenever one eigenvalue crosses zero, two will cross.

Summarizing, we want to know how many times the sign of the square root of the determinant of a Dirac operator changes sign as one circumnavigates the circle. The eigenvalues of the Dirac operator come in pairs, and the sign changes each time a pair crosses zero. Thus we are counting the zeroes of the Dirac operator on the space $$M\times S^1$$. These zeroes are counted by the Atiyah–Singer index theorem, which gives the answer h times the second Chern class of the gauge bundle over $$M\times S^1$$. This second Chern class may be any integer. In particular it may be one, in which case the sign changes h times. If the sign changes an odd number of times then the partition function is ill-defined, and so there is an anomaly.

In conclusion, we have found that there is an anomaly if the number n of Majorana fermions is odd and if the dual Coxeter number h of the gauge group is also odd.

Chern–Simons gauge theories
3-dimensional Chern–Simons gauge theories are also anomalous when their level is half-integral. In fact, the derivation is identical to that above. Using Stokes' theorem and the fact that the exterior derivative of the Chern–Simons action is equal to the instanton number, the 4-dimensional theory on $$M\times S^1$$ has a theta angle equal to the level of the Chern–Simons theory, and so the 4-dimensional partition function is equal to -1 precisely when the instanton number is odd. This implies that the 3-dimensional partition function is ill-defined by a factor of -1 when considering deformations over a path with an odd number of instantons.

Fractional quantization conditions
In particular, the anomalies coming from fermions and the half-level Chern–Simons terms will cancel if and only if the number of Majorana fermions plus twice the Chern–Simons level is even. In the case n=1, this statement is the half-integer quantization condition in $$\mathcal{N}=1$$ supersymmetric Chern–Simons gauge theories presented in The Chern-Simons Coefficient in Supersymmetric Yang-Mills Chern-Simons Theories. When n=2 this contribution to the partition function was found in $$\mathcal{N}=2$$ and 3 gauge theories in Branes and Supersymmetry Breaking in Three Dimensional Gauge Theories.

One-loop correction to the Chern–Simons level
The fact that both Chern–Simons terms and Majorana fermions are anomalous under deformations with odd instanton numbers is not a coincidence. When the Pauli–Villars mass for n Majorana fermions is taken to infinity, Redlich found that the remaining contribution to the partition function is equal to a Chern–Simons term at level −n/2. This means in particular that integrating out n charged Majorana fermions renormalizes the Chern–Simons level of the corresponding gauge theory by −n/2. The fact that the Chern–Simons level is only allowed to take discrete values implies that the coupling constant can not enter into the correction to the level. This only occurs for the 1-loop correction, therefore the contribution of the Majorana fermions to the Chern–Simons level may be precisely calculated at 1-loop and all higher loop corrections vanish.

title: Parity anomaly


text:
Pas d'armes

The pas d'armes or passage of arms was a type of chivalric hastilude (martial game) that evolved in the late 14th century and remained popular through the 15th century. It involved a knight or group of knights (tenans or "holders") who would stake out a traveled spot, such as a bridge or city gate, and let it be known that any other knight who wished to pass (venans or "comers") must first fight, or be disgraced. If a traveling venan did not have weapons or horse to meet the challenge, one might be provided, and if the venan chose not to fight, he would leave his spurs behind as a sign of humiliation. If a lady passed unescorted, she would leave behind a glove or scarf, to be rescued and returned to her by a future knight who passed that way.

The origins of pas d'armes can be found in a number of factors. During the 14th and 15th centuries the chivalric idea of a noble knight clashed with new more deadly forms of warfare, as seen during the Hundred Years' War, when commoner yeomanry armed with longbows could attack noble knights anonymously from a distance, breaking traditional rules of chivalry, and cavalry charges by knights could be broken by the pikemen formations introduced by the Swiss.

At the same time, the noble classes began to differentiate themselves, in many ways, including through reading courtly literature such as the very popular chivalric romances of the 12th century. For the noble classes the line between reality and fiction blurred, the deeds they read about were real, while their deeds in reality were often deadly, if not comical, re-enactments of those they read about. This romanticised "Chivalric Revival" manifested itself in a number of ways, including the pas d'armes, round table and emprise (or empresa, enterprise, chivalrous adventure), and in increasingly elaborate rules of courtesy and heraldry.

There are many thousands of accounts of pas d'armes during this period. One notable and special account is that of Suero de Quiñones, who in 1434 established the Passo Honroso ("Pass[age] of Honour") at the Órbigo bridge in the Kingdom of León (today's Castile and León in Spain). This road was used by pilgrims from all over Europe on the way to shrine at Santiago de Compostela. Suero and ten knights promised to "break 300 lances" before relinquishing the pas d'armes, jousting for over a month, as chronicled in great detail by town notary Don Luis Alonso Luengo, later published as Libro del Passo honroso. After 166 battles, de Quiñones and his men were so injured they could not continue and declared the mission complete. Suero de Quiñones became legendary, and was mentioned in Don Quixote, the 1605 satire on the notion of romantic chivalry out of touch with reality.

List of pas d'armes

 * Passo de la Fuerte Ventura (1428)
 * Suero de Quiñones' Passo Honroso (Órbigo, 1434)
 * Pas de l'Arbre Charlemagne (Dijon, 1443)
 * Pas du Rocher Périlleux (1445)
 * Pas de la Pastourelle (around 1445)
 * Pas de Nancy (Nancy, 1445)
 * Pas de la Joyeuse Garde (1446)
 * Pas de la Belle Pèlerine (Saint-Omer, 1449)
 * Pas de la Bergère (1449)
 * Pas de la Fontaine aux Pleurs (Chalon-sur-Saône, 1449–1450)
 * Pas du Chevalier au Cygne (Lille, 1454)
 * Pas du Pin aux Pommes d'Or (1455)
 * Pas de la Dame Inconnue (1463)
 * Pas du Perron Fée (Bruges, (1463)
 * Pas de l'Arbre d'Or, (Bruges, 1468)
 * Pas de la Dame Sauvage (Ghent, 1470)

title: Pas d'armes


text:
User:Brandtc

In the 1940’s, biochemists George Beadle and Edward Tatum made breakthrough discoveries that led to their conclusion of the One Gene – One Enzyme hypothesis. Beadle and Tatum treated the bread mold Neurospora crassa with x-rays, which produced mutants that differed from the original mold based on their nutritional needs. It was found that the new mutant could not survive based on the minimal medium (consisting of agar, inorganic salts, glucose, and biotin) that was supplied. From this point, Beadle and Tatum took samples from the mutant and distributed them to different vials which held the minimal medium and an additional nutrient. A metabolic defect was detected by the supplement that allowed growth. The use of genetic crosses allowed the researchers to determine that not all of the mutations occurred at the same gene and where a single gene was mutated; it caused the lack of an enzyme. The One Gene – One Enzyme hypothesis ultimately stated that the function of a gene is to dictate the production of a specific enzyme. Additional research led to the revision of the One Gene – One Enzyme hypothesis. Because proteins are gene products (and not all proteins are enzymes), biochemists began to think in the direction of one gene – one protein. Furthermore, it was known that two or more polypeptides aid in the production of proteins, and a specific gene codes for each polypeptide. Specific research comparing sickle cell and normal hemoglobin molecules by Pauling and Itano lead to the final modification of the hypothesis. Beadle and Tatum’s conclusion came to be known as the One Gene – One Polypeptide hypothesis.

[[Media:http://www.accessexcellence.org/RC/AB/BC/One_Gene_One_Enzyme.html http://www.mansfield.ohio-state.edu/~sabedon/campbl17.htm]]

title: User:Brandtc


text:
Wikipedia:Peer review/Kibbutz/archive1

Kibbutz
I have been working on this article for about two weeks. I am hoping to nominate it to be a Featured Article, but I know that it can be improved. As I envision it, the article is 95 percent complete. I'll let you all be the judges of how comprehensive and well written it is, but this article contains much more information than is available on Britannica. Hopefully, after a few days here this article will be in good enough shape to move to the FAC page. I welcome your advice.Dinopup 04:59, 23 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Definitely a good start. So a few observations: 1) I moved the picture to the right so as not to break the page and the table of contents. 2) The lead section should be expanded. It should summarize all of the important features of the topic and ease the reader in. That is generally considered to be 2-3 paragraphs for an article this size. It should tell a little more about the role it says they play in Israeli society. If you expand the lead section enough, maybe the picture could go back to the left, but that is very nonstandard. 3) Eliminate one sentence paragraphs. They make the prose flow badly and highlight areas that should either be expanded into a full idea or merged with neighboring paragraphs. 4) A little more context on the 'Pioneers' section is needed. Someone shouldn't have to already know the exact dates and history of initial Iraeli settlement to know what is going on and when, as the article currently requires. When did the first Jewish settlers come in? When was the British mandate? - Taxman 21:51, Feb 23, 2005 (UTC)
 * Per your suggestions I eliminated all the one sentence paragraphs and added information about the ideological background of the earliest kibbutzniks. I'm not 100% satisfied with the beginnings of the ideology section.  I hate to do anything that isn't "prosical," but I'm thinking of explaining the kibbutz ideology with bullet points.  Rather than have unheaded paragraphs explaining the Zionist kibbutz ideology I could do bullet points on kibbutz motivation like this
 * 1. redeem the Jewish nation through physical work
 * 2. Improve the land of Palestine - i.e. "make the desert bloom."
 * 3. pure communism.
 * I'll do kibbutz ideology with headings like that if you think the ideology section isn't clear enough.Dinopup 17:31, 24 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Good fixes so far. Some more observations for you then. 1) The two sentence paragraphs are often nearly as choppy as the one, same basic problem, but eliminating the one sentence ones is a good start. 2) The context in the 'Pioneers' section is way better, it just makes the section too long. See what can either be summarized or separated out as a distinct section if it makes sense. 3) The lead section still needs expanding, but maybe it would be better to improve that once you have the article as fleshed out as you think it can be/needs to be. Then when the article is reasonably stable, it may be easier to write the best summary of the subject. 4) Now there are a number of copyedits that need to be made, either from unfinished sentences or those that aren't very clear. Here are some examples: "and decided to take part in the (Silver-Brody, 33,36)..." What finishes that sentence? The sentence "If the settled Arabs were not violent, sabotage of irrigation canals or burning of fields occurred." has a lot of problems. What settled Arabs? who sabatoged the irrigation canals? Also POV concerns about that claim. 5) There is some POV that has crept in. Any statement that is not obviously true on the face of it could use citation to a good source. You have started along that path, just keep it up. Also the risk is that if you use all Jewish author sources (just my impression so far), you have nothing about what the other groups felt about it. Try to get some sources from or representing the Ottomans/Arabs/Muslims in the area and their characterization of the facts. 6) Finally the whole thing needs careful attention to cohesiveness. Similar topics are scattered in different places and claims in one section only partly support those in others. Hope that helps. - Taxman 18:40, Feb 24, 2005 (UTC)
 * Taxman, thank you very much for your help. I have implemented many of your suggestions.  I've added more of the Arab POV, I've expanded the Pioneers section, I've made copyedits.  I might be making a few copy edits from here on out, but I think in terms of content we're good.  It is difficult to isolate information in single sections -describing the history of the kibbutz movement, it's impossible not to talk about things that could be included in daily life and economics.  If it appears that there are contradictions, that is probably the result of the age and diversity of the kibbutz movement itself.  Kibbutzim were founded to be places of Jewish labor, now that kibbutzniks are less enthusiastic about labor, there are hired workers.  Unless you have more advice (and your advice has been great), I'm going to let this stabilize, and then promote the article to FAC.Dinopup 02:32, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)

title: Wikipedia:Peer review/Kibbutz/archive1


text:
User talk:Rkv

Welcome!

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and vote pages using three tildes, like this: ~~~. Four tildes (~~~~) produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my Talk page. Again, welcome! --Goobergunch|? 04:59, 23 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * How to edit a page
 * Editing, policy, conduct, and structure tutorial
 * Picture tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Naming conventions
 * Manual of Style
 * If you're ready for the complete list of Wikipedia documentation, there's also Topical index.

title: User talk:Rkv


text:
Talk:Indus Creed

(copyvio)? Hyacinth 05:02, 23 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Untitled

 * Copyvio tag removed, unable to find source of copyright violation. --Duk 05:33, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Bombay vs Mumbai
The article links Bombay to the redirector, but doesn't link Mumbai to the actual Mumbai page. I think linking Mumbai would be more accurate and correct, regardless of how much we may like the name Bombay.
 * ✅ Remember, Wikipedia is the encyclopedia that anyone can edit, even you! In the future, feel free to make these sorts of changes yourself, with perhaps an explanation here on the talk page. --Danger (talk) 05:01, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

Problems
The article reads like a promotion of the band Indus Creed, making claims without any reference being cited. Debangshu Mukherjee (talk) 20:17, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

Rewrite
I intend to overhaul this article during this weekend. When I begin working, I will delete unsourced potentially controversial statements from the article and it will be, temporarily, extremely short. If anyone has any objections to this method, I will create a subpage and edit there instead. --Danger (talk) 05:31, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Indus Creed. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added tag to http://www.hindustantimes.com/Entertainment/Music/Indus-Creed-reunite/Article1-609504.aspx
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120422092215/http://www.wheelsunplugged.com/ViewNews.aspx?newsid=8317 to http://www.wheelsunplugged.com/ViewNews.aspx?newsid=8317
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120425115750/http://gibsonguitar.in/News-Lifestyle/News/hi-in/Indus-Creed-Inducted-into-Indian-Recording-Arts-Ac.aspx to http://gibsonguitar.in/News-Lifestyle/News/hi-in/Indus-Creed-Inducted-into-Indian-Recording-Arts-Ac.aspx

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 01:13, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

title: Talk:Indus Creed


text:
Ludwig Börne

Karl Ludwig Börne (born Loeb Baruch; 6 May 1786 – 12 February 1837) was a German-Jewish political writer and satirist, who is considered part of the Young Germany movement.

Early life
Karl Ludwig Börne was born Loeb Baruch on 6 May 1786, at Frankfurt am Main, to a Jewish family. He was the son of Jakob Baruch, a banker. His grandfather had been a government bureaucrat.

Education
Börne and his brothers were privately tutored by Jacob Sachs, and later by Rector Mosche. At age 14, he studied medicine with Professor Hetzel at Gießen. After a year, he was sent to study medicine at Berlin under a physician, Markus Herz, in whose house he lived. At age 16, Baruch became infatuated by his patron's 38-year-old wife, Henriette Herz. After her husband died in 1803, he expressed his adoration in a series of letters. When he enrolled at Halle University, she was influential in his boarding with Professor Reil. He studied constitutional law and political science at University of Heidelberg and Giessen. There, he received his PhD in 1809 with the dissertation Ueber die Geometrische Vertheilung der Staatsgebiete.

Career
On his return to Frankfurt, now constituted as a grand duchy under the sovereignty of the prince bishop Karl von Dalberg, he received (1811) the appointment of police actuary in that city.

In 1814, he had to resign his post due to his ethnicity. Embittered by the oppression suffered by Jews in Germany, he took to journalism and edited the Frankfurt liberal newspapers Staatsristretto and Die Zeitschwingen.

Later life
In 1818, he converted to Lutheran Protestantism, changing his name from Loeb Baruch to Ludwig Börne. From 1818 to 1821, he edited Die Wage, a paper distinguished by its lively political articles and its powerful but sarcastic theatrical criticisms. This paper was suppressed by the police, and in 1821, Börne took a pause from journalism and led a quiet life in Paris, Hamburg, and Frankfurt.

After the July Revolution (1830), he hurried to Paris, expecting to find society nearer to his own ideas of freedom. Although to some extent disappointed in his hopes, he did not look any more kindly on the political condition of Germany; this lent additional zest to the brilliant satirical letters (Briefe aus Paris, 1830–1833, published Paris, 1834), which he began to publish in his last literary venture, La Balance, a revival of Die Wage. The Briefe aus Paris was Börne's most important publication, and a landmark in the history of German journalism. Its appearance led him to be regarded as a leading thinker in Germany.

Death and legacy
He died in Paris in 1837.

Börne's works are known for brilliant style and for thorough French satire. His best criticism is to be found in his Denkrede auf Jean Paul (1826) – a writer for whom he had warm sympathy and admiration –, in his Dramaturgische Blätter (1829–1834), and the witty satire Menzel der Franzosenfresser (1837). He also wrote a number of short stories and sketches, of which the best known are the Monographie der deutschen Postschnecke (1829) and Der Esskünstler (1822).

In his first volume of Sigmund Freud's biography, Ernest Jones relates that "Böeme" [sic] was an especial favourite in Freud's adolescence, a half century later quoting many passages from the essay "The Art of Becoming an Original Writer", which clearly played a part in Freud's putting his trust in free association during psycho-analysis:

Two portraits of him, by the Jewish painter Daniel M. Oppenheim, are in the Israel Museum Collection.

Legacy
The town of Boerne in the U.S. state of Texas, founded by German liberal immigrants (Forty-Eighters), is named after him. The town is a part of the San Antonio metropolitan area.

The Börne Gallery at the Jewish Museum Frankfurt in Frankfurt, Germany is also named after him.

title: Ludwig Börne


text:
Matsuya (department store)

Matsuya Co., Ltd. (株式会社松屋) tyo: 8237 is a Japanese department store in Tokyo. Founded in 1869, it has stores in Ginza (est. 1925) and Asakusa (est. 1930s). The Ginza branch is the company's headquarters.

Arising from the Meiji Restoration, the company was founded in 1869 in Yokohama as Tsuruya, a store selling cotton for kimono. In 1889, it bought Imagawa Matsuya, a Tokyo kimono fabric store founded in 1776, and adopted the latter's name because of its historic lineage. It opened a three-story Western-style store in 1907, and a modern department store in 1925 in Ginza.

In the 1960s, the Ginza branch held two well-regarded art exhibitions: "From Space to Environment" and "Good Design".

In 1971, Matuya began a loose partnership / cooperation agreement with Isetan, another Japanese department store. In 2002, Matsuya purchased Isetan stock in an attempt to cement the relationship. However, the two firms grew apart in 2007 after Isetan agreed to merge with Matsuya's bitter rival Mitsukoshi, which also operates a flagship department store in Ginza, and form Isetan Mitsukoshi Holdings.

On 27 September 2012, Asakusa-Matsuya was renewed as "EKIMISE" and exteriors were changed to the former Asakusa-Matsuya which was opened in 1931 because Tokyo Skytree was opened

In April 2019, Matsuya held a promotion to celebrate the announcement of the new imperial era name, Rei-wa, providing special treatment for customers whose names contained either of the Chinese characters rei or wa.

title: Matsuya (department store)