Gius: Forschungsdesiderat: best practice-Vorschläge für kollaborative Annotation literarischer Texte #dhd2016 #v4a
— sabine seifert (@sabine_seifert) 10. März 2016
Gius: Hauptproblem: lit. Texte sind polyvalent –> kollaboratives Annotieren dient nicht dem Finden der einen richtigen Lesart #dhd2016 #v4a
— sabine seifert (@sabine_seifert) 10. März 2016
Gius: litwiss. Analysekategorien oft unterdefiniert -> vor finaler Annotation müssen Unklarheiten behoben werden #dhd2016 #v4a
— sabine seifert (@sabine_seifert) 10. März 2016
Gius: heureCLEA: Entwicklung einer „digitalen Heuristik“- Modul zur Unterstützung litwiss. Annotation, Interpretation v Texten #dhd2016 #v4a
— sabine seifert (@sabine_seifert) 10. März 2016
Evelyn Gius mit Einteilung zeitlicher Aspekte im Projekt https://t.co/bJB1GajII3 #v4a #dhd2016 pic.twitter.com/6wO6psyAXm
— Stefan Münnich (@music_enfanthen) 10. März 2016
Sieht wild aus, wurde aber gut erklärt! #dhd2016 pic.twitter.com/fS25fbK2RG
— Peter Stadler (@ps_tadler) 10. März 2016
Gius berichtet von narratologischem Annotationssystem mit Hand und Fuß! heureCléa #dhd2016 pic.twitter.com/okUbplNiwG
— J. Berenike Herrmann (@Jberenike) 10. März 2016
.@ps_tadler Gius macht Vorschlag für konkretes Ablaufschema für kollaboratives literaturwiss. Annotieren #dhd2016 #v4a
— sabine seifert (@sabine_seifert) 10. März 2016
Teamarbeit in der Literaturwissenschaft: kollaboratives annotieren mit heureCLÉA https://t.co/CUZu3ah785 #dhd2016
— Mathias (@goebel_m) 10. März 2016
bei Gius zeigt sich erneut: Nicht basale Fehler erzeugen die Fragen, sondern der Umgang mit den Unschärfen der GW #v4a #dhd2016
— Stefan Münnich (@music_enfanthen) 10. März 2016
Stichwort: Legitimierte Widersprüchlichkeit. Evelyn Gius #v4a #dhd2016
— Stefan Münnich (@music_enfanthen) 10. März 2016
]]>Gius: Komplexität und (domainspez.) Ranking d Interpretationsabhängigkeit v. Annotationskategorien. #dhd2016 #v4a
— Andreas Wagner (@anwagnerdreas) 10. März 2016
The following tweets give an impression of how our talk was received.
best thing about crowdsourcing/collaboration is getting data that questions basic assumptions and validity of research questions #dh2015
— Rachel L Frick (@rlfrick) July 1, 2015
#dh2015 great presentation on the value of multidisciplinary approaches by members of http://t.co/enclkap1ZT
— Bridget Almas (@BridgetAlmas) July 1, 2015
'There's real polyvalance and then there are fuzzy concepts' #dh2015
— Tom Schofield (@tomschofield) July 1, 2015
Often in literary studies, every uncertainty is seen as polyvalence. It’s not – some is, but some is just fuzzy markup concepts #DH2015
— Mike Jones (@mikejonesmelb) July 1, 2015
CATMA es un programa con el que se busca dar solución al problema de las múltiples interpretaciones de un texto literario #dh2015
— Llámame Ficino (@epriani) July 1, 2015
Tension between dynamics of engagement and accademic dissent as knowledge problem but also as chance to balance out privileges #dh2015
— Arianna Ciula (@ariciula) July 1, 2015
Community input pushes against the research question… Our research, collections & history has and does not exist in a vacuum). #DH2015
— Louise Denoon (@Louisedenoon) July 1, 2015
]]>.@janchrismeister on collaborative markup environment almost to elicit disagreement (also with oneself) #dh2015
— Arianna Ciula (@ariciula) July 1, 2015
]]>
Great presentation by Janina Jacke http://t.co/qQSdAYgbbk which provoked a very interesting discussion #dh #enn4
— GhentCDH (@GhentCDH) April 16, 2015
Janina Jacke: reasons for inconsistent narr. analyses 1/ill defined cat 2/theory dep. cat 3/ling. ambiguity 4/aesthetic polyvalence #ENN4
— Saskia Scheltjens (@saschel) April 16, 2015
]]>DH approach pinpoints openness of core concepts eg #prolepsis; Genette is not simply descriptive #enn4 pic.twitter.com/BjUJRhfJXO
— Gunther Martens (@gumarten) April 16, 2015
If you want to read more about the idea of the workshop click here.
]]>
Program
Wednesday, 4 December 2013
9.30 a.m. – 1 p.m.:
2 p.m. – 5 p.m.:
Thursday, 5 December 2013
9.30 a.m. – 1 p.m.:
]]>
DCI – The Digital Commons Initiative
which is funded by the Alexander-von-Humboldt-Foundation. The workshop is organized by the DCI team in cooperation with the team of the eHumanities project heureCLÉA around Prof. Jan Christoph Meister. The invited academics from different countries and continents hold expertise in computer science, linguistics, literary studies, and historial science. Together, they will discuss how the results of textual analysis can fruitfully be processed through data visualization. The envisaged outcome of the workshop is to develop visualization-prototypes that are adjusted to the specifics of different types of text analytical research questions. This methodologically informed preselection of practical visualizations will enable newcomers to benefit from the value of visualizations.
]]>