Italian Text Messaging - Italian SMS Abbreviazioni

Dm c sent x spr ki dv venr. Does that sentence resemble a message from extraterrestri telefonino Ideographic Italian accento acuto Italian SMS Abbreviations Italian SMS Standard Italian anche ci sentiamo comunque domani dopo dire dove sei destra forse che chi come con cosa mi manchi tantissimo numero non prossimo qualche qualcosa qualcuno quando quindi quanto questo rispondi scusa solo sempre messaggio sono sapere sinistra spero ti telefono tardi tranquillo troppo ti voglio tanto bene volevo perchà © percià ² per ora perà ² persona tanti baci meno male pià ¹ o meno per Did you understand any of this? Maybe its appropriate now to ask: Povera lingua italiana dv 6?

Bolling v. Sharpe Supreme Court Case, Arguments, Impact

Bolling v. Sharpe (1954) asked the Supreme Court to determine the constitutionality of segregation in Washington, D.C., public schools. In a unanimous decision, the Court ruled that segregation denied black students due process under the Fifth Amendment. Fast Facts: Bolling v. Sharpe Case Argued: December 10—11, 1952; December 8—9, 1953Decision Issued:  May 17, 1954Petitioner:  Spotswood Thomas Bolling, et alRespondent:  C. Melvin Sharpe, et alKey Questions: Did segregation in Washington D.C.’s public schools violate the Due Process Clause?Unanimous Decision: Justices Warren, Black, Reed, Frankfurter, Douglas, Jackson, Burton, Clark, and MintonRuling: Racial discrimination in the public schools of Washington, D.C. did deny blacks due process of law as protected by the Fifth Amendment. Facts of the Case In 1947, Charles Houston began working with Consolidated Parents Group, a campaign to end segregation in Washington, D.C. schools. A local barber, Gardner Bishop, brought Houston on board. While Bishop ran demonstrations and wrote letters to the editor, Houston worked on the legal approach. Houston was a civil rights lawyer and began systematically filing cases against D.C. schools alleging inequities in class sizes, facilities, and learning materials. Before the cases went to trial, Houstons health failed. A Harvard professor, James Madison Nabrit Jr., agreed to help but insisted on taking on a new case. Eleven black students were rejected from a brand new high school with unfilled classrooms. Nabrit argued that the rejection violated the Fifth Amendment, an argument that had not been previously used. Most lawyers argued that segregation violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The U.S. District Court rejected the argument. While waiting for an appeal, Nabrit petitioned the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court granted certiorari as part of a group of cases dealing with segregation. The decision in Bolling v. Sharpe was handed down the same day as Brown v. Board of Education. Constitutional Issues Does public school segregation violate the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment? Is education a fundamental right? The Fifth Amendment to the Constitution states that: No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation. Arguments Nabrit was joined by fellow attorney Charles E.C. Hayes for oral arguments before the Supreme Court. The Fourteenth Amendment only applies to the states. As a result, an equal protection argument could not be used to argue the unconstitutionality of segregation in Washington, D.C., schools. Instead, Hayes argued that the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment protected students against segregation. Segregation itself, he argued, was inherently unconstitutional because it arbitrarily deprived students of liberty. During Nabrits portion of the argument, he suggested that amendments to the Constitution after the Civil War removed any dubious power which the Federal Government may have had prior to that time to deal with people solely on the basis of race or color. Nabrit also referenced the Supreme Courts decision in Korematsu v. U.S. to show that the court had only authorized arbitrary suspensions of liberty under very specific circumstances. Nabrit argued that the Court could not demonstrate a convincing reason to deprive black students the liberty to be educated alongside white student in D.C. public schools. Majority Opinion Chief Justice Earl E. Warren delivered the unanimous opinion in Bolling v. Sharpe. The Supreme Court found that segregation in public schools denied black students due process of law under the Fifth Amendment. The Due Process Clause prevents the federal government from denying someone life, liberty, or property. In this case, the District of Columbia deprived students of liberty when it discriminated on the basis of race. The Fifth Amendment, added about 80 years earlier than the Fourteenth Amendment, does not have an equal protection clause. Justice Warren wrote, on behalf of the Court, that equal protection and due process were not one in the same. However, they both suggested the importance of equality. The Court noted that discrimination may be so unjustifiable as to be violative of due process. The Justices chose not to define liberty. Instead, they argued that it covers a large range of conduct. The government cannot legally restrict liberty unless that restriction is related to a legitimate government objective. Justice Warren wrote: Segregation in public education is not reasonably related to any proper governmental objective, and thus it imposes on Negro children of the District of Columbia a burden that constitutes an arbitrary deprivation of their liberty in violation of the Due Process Clause. Finally, the Court found that if the Constitution prevented states from racially segregating their public schools, it would prevent the Federal Government from doing the same. Impact Bolling v. Sharpe was part of a group of landmark cases that forged a path for de-segregation. The decision in Bolling v. Sharpe was distinct from Brown v. Board of Education because it used the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment instead of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. In doing so, the Supreme Court created reverse incorporation. Incorporation is the legal doctrine that makes the first ten amendments applicable to the states using the Fourteenth Amendment. In Bolling v. Sharpe the Supreme Court reverse engineered it. The Court made the Fourteenth Amendment applicable to the federal government using one of the first ten amendments. Sources Bolling v. Sharpe, 347 U.S. 497 (1954)â€Å"Order of Argument in the Case, Brown v. Board of Education.†Ã‚  National Archives and Records Administration, www.archives.gov/education/lessons/brown-case-order.â€Å"Hayes and Nabrit Oral Arguments.†Ã‚  Digital Archive: Brown v. Board of Education, University of Michigan Library, www.lib.umich.edu/brown-versus-board-education/oral/HayesNabrit.pdf.

To what extent is Chapter 1 of Sense and Sensibility a fitting introduction for the novel to come Free Essays

In this novel, Austen is setting out rules of conduct for women in a time when England was moving from a period a long stability to sudden and total change. Unless people knew how to behave, she thought, chaos would ensue. England was entering the Industrial Revolution, having just seen the French Revolution and the American War of Independence. We will write a custom essay sample on To what extent is Chapter 1 of Sense and Sensibility a fitting introduction for the novel to come? or any similar topic only for you Order Now A new literary style was sweeping the nation, one to which Austen was much opposed: Romanticism. A dichotomy had arisen from the popularity of Romanticism within the literary groups of the time. It is possible to label these two groups as ‘Sense’ and ‘Sensibility’. (The Gothic style also came about at this time, championed by those who had suddenly discovered freedom [both literary and, in some cases, physical] with the fall of oppressive governments surrounding England – Austen also wrote anti-Gothic novels, like Northanger Abbey. ) Austen was definitely in support of ‘Sense’, which this novel shows so clearly. Austen argues her case for sense over sensibility by polarising the main protagonists on the subject. Marianne represents sensibility in all its dramatic, baroque and over-the-top glory, whilst Elinor represents sense (not cold, emotionless logic, but a tactful reason about situations). Although Austen shows the reader the downsides of both poles, sensibility is harshly and heavily punished and in the end sense wins out when Elinor gets to marry the man she wants and Marianne gives up sensibility and accepts an unconvincing happy ending with a socially respectable result. Austen, then, is writing not a novel, but a book of behaviour for women in this tumultuous time, much in keeping with little girls’ conduct books of the time. The first chapter so brilliantly allows for these developments later in the book by not mentioning them at all, or at least not until the closing paragraphs in which the reader is introduced to Elinor and Marianne. This first chapter is primarily concerned in setting up Austen’s character in the book, that of satirical social commentator and moral guide. And this character is set up within the opening paragraph. Austen’s behaviour as author in this chapter almost contradicts Elinor later on. The way the aristocratic Dashwood family interact with each other on human terms is mocked and pulled apart by Austen’s scathing irony; these first paragraphs could almost be in defence of sensibility! Relationships are described in contractual terms: no longer is your son family, he is clientele; no longer do you love, you esteem. Family isn’t about affection, its about affectation. Appearance and finance are all that matter on the Norland estate, respectability and wealth. People are spoken of in terms of utility and actions are taken for the sole purpose of acquiring wealth. Any affection shown with that is an added bonus, purely accidental and by no means essential to the relationship. There is one sentence at the end of the first paragraph in which are contained almost all of the social morays with which Austen holds qualm, and she makes her qualms clear with her irony and diction: â€Å"The constant attention of Mr. And Mrs. Henry Dashwood to his wishes, which proceeded, not merely from interest, but from goodness of heart, gave him every degree of solid comfort his heart could receive†. â€Å"The constant attention†, not constant affection, or even constant love, no, â€Å"constant attention†. They waited on him, served him as best they could to ensure a large chunk of inheritance, but not to worry, they did not do this â€Å"merely from interest, but from goodness of heart†. This sentence does not redeem their greed, but rather reinforces it, that â€Å"merely† adds dimensions to this sentence which implies that even if they were good of heart, they were still selfish and out for all the could get. Finally, the comfort they offer the old man is only â€Å"solid†, no more than materialistic. They do not enrich him spiritually or intellectually, only materially. Austen has now set out the rules for the following novel, without even bringing her protagonists to light. Austen is by far the most important character in the book, and her characterisation, therefore, is the most important. It is essential for the reader to know Austen before the reader knows Elinor or Marianne, or else the aim of this book to teach people how to behave would be lost. The fact that Austen seems to be pulling apart the social order whilst Elinor is in whole-hearted support for retaining the social order may seem perplexing, but I think a solution comes if one understands Austen as a person of moderation. She punishes Elinor also (though less harshly than Marianne) for being too restrained. In so many passages in the book there is an awful feeling of imprisonment on the part of Elinor as she is unable to do anything socially unacceptable. Therefore, there is contradiction between Austen and Elinor, but that is because Elinor is not Austen, she is not perfect or correct or a paragon of what Austen believes correct behaviour for a woman. Sense is supported, but room for emotion must be allowed or one is not human, says Austen, but cold and dead. How to cite To what extent is Chapter 1 of Sense and Sensibility a fitting introduction for the novel to come?, Papers

Film and theatre Essay Example For Students

Film and theatre Essay The Shakespearean play, Much Ado About Nothing, is traditionally portrayed over  the theatre, but there is also a film version. Although there are a few similarities between the film and the play, for instance the script of the film is virtually the same as the original play, there are apparently more differences between the two versions.  Firstly, the play apparently seems to be significantly more formal and serious while  the film version is portrayed as more informal and fun. This may be because the film maker uses visual effects and the entertaining actions of the actors while the play can only describe and express everything means of speech. Another subtle difference is that in film, the expressions and actions of the actors play  a large part in a comedy like Much Ado About Nothing. It isnt just the script that creates laughter, but the manner in which they are set up and delivered. In the film, many other actions are shown which are not in the play.  Good examples are Benedict antics with a folding chair, which add to the comic quality of the scene. Dogberry who is a clown in the original play, pretending to arrive on horseback, grimacing, performing antics like galloping around on a non-existent horse,  add to the laughter brought by the text which is his constant use of wrong words in his speech. These are the kinds of things that cannot appear on the written page. The film also contains its share of drama, and the pathos and poignancy come as easily and naturally as humour and do not need to be expressed in words.  Also the actors expressions and movement help to show their emotions, which in the play can only be show by their use of words. For example in the first wedding scene where Claudio accuses Hero of being a wanton and shameless woman, Heros expressive reaction and crying evoke emotions in the audience and make us sympathize with her even more than when we read the play. The play does not state and describe the setting and so does not play a very important role in establishing the mood of the scene. On the other hand, the film is set in the countryside, constantly outdoors in the sunshine. The setting in a film is very important because it sets the mood. Utilizing the beautiful rose coloured villa, gorgeous scenery,  it expresses the happiness of the scene to the audience of the film which cannot be expressed in words.  Moreover, to maintain the lividness of the film and to keep the audience attention,  many lines and speeches and even entire scenes have to be cut, for instance Act I Scene 2 and Act III Scene 4. Another difference would be the use of music and dance in the film. Music helps to bring out the mood of the scene. Beatrice swinging happily superimposed over Benedick dancing in the fountain with soaring music expresses the happiness they were feeling at that very moment. Even more vivid is dance, which is present in the party and at the end during the wedding, effectively portrays the happy and joyous feeling of the scene, which cannot be shown and described in the written play. Furthermore the use of costume in the film helps to differentiate good from evil.  For instance, all the ladies are in white while the gentleman in off-white and earth tones intensify the bucolic and innocent interpretation of the play. Don Johns dressing on the other hand is dark, which portrays evil.  In conclusion, the main difference of film and theatre is that because the film is audio-visual brings another dimension to the story line and helps one better understand the plot through the use of music, acting and setting. Theatre on the other hand only can bring this out through means of speech making it less appealing and harder to understand.