|
|
|
Sort Order |
|
|
|
Items / Page
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
153536
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Issues of authenticity, originality, and plagiarism have haunted Francophone literatures from the time Camara Laye was first accused of having copied the work of others. Official positions on plagiarism and copyright have provided a framework to judge the originality of literary and scholarly work, but even these pronouncements leave much open to interpretation, which may, in fact, mask the real motivations for accusations of plagiarism. Francophone writers with links to Vietnam would also be under scrutiny in such a context. Linda Lê, the most prolific writer “from Vietnam” who writes in French, cleverly and playfully treats the questions of literary authenticity, creativity, originality, intertextuality, and authorship in a strong metatextual thread running in some form throughout her long bibliography. In this way, she also examines the position of the immigrant writer in exile, the negotiation of multiple heritages and languages, and what is necessarily the shifting literary scene in France and elsewhere, as immigrant writers, among others, redefine “French literature.”
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
155672
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
While Chinese academic excellence is gaining increasing international recognition, plagiarism, corruption, nepotism and other negative practices are reportedly rampant in academia in China. Many point the finger at fundamental flaws within the tizhi, the highly structured Chinese socio-political system. I propose re-examining Chinese academia and its practices by applying and expanding Pierre Bourdieu's notion of field as this framework helps to identify the predicament of the “deep water” in which Chinese scholars and institutes find themselves. The four fields I outline – ideological, quasi-official, fame–profit and guanxi fields – spotlight academic practices with “Chinese characteristics.” I elaborate on my own experiences and reflections as both an insider and outsider to these practices, a position which I refer to as a third-eye perspective. I argue that despite the constraints of the “deep water,” the field-oriented angle of investigation reveals that the depths and types of “deep water” vary from one institute to another and also that the internally generated ongoing initiatives promise a step-by-step transformation in Chinese academia. To provoke further thought, I contend that the Chinese case is both a non-exception and alternative to the Western (and other) practices. In so doing, I call for a balanced perspective to re-examine Chinese academic ecology.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 3 |
ID:
118618
|
|
|
| 4 |
ID:
096213
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2010.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The problem of plagiarism by political scientists has not received much attention. The incidence of plagiarism, however, may be greater than one would think. In this article, I offer a humorous look at what happened when a manuscript of mine was plagiarized. Based on my experience, I offer some suggestions on how scholars might detect and prevent plagiarism.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|