You are here

New Paradigms via a Renewed Set of Prefixes?

Dependence of international policy-making on an array of operational terms (Part #1)


Introduction
Preliminary results
Table 1
Table 2
Procedure
Comment
Clustering
Space and Time
Language issues
Epistemological framework
Peronal implicatons: "seizing the day"
References

[Parts: Next | Last | All ] [Links: To-K | From-K | From-Kx | Refs ]


Introduction

The purpose of the exercise described here is to determine whether the language of policy-making in English is highly dependent on a relatively limited set of conceptual operators and to order these so as to enable questions to be raised concerning the possibility -- and even the necessity -- of identifying other kinds of operator that might be vital to emergence of new paradigms. An additional concern is the possibility that the failure of management worldwide to engage in more than reactive responses to the world problematique -- first identified by the Club of Rome in the 1970s -- may be partly due to the inadequacies of this framework.

The following two tables (Tables 1 and 2) constitute a single table that has been split for viewing and printing convenience. It is the result of an experiment in identifying a particular group of prefixes that is associated with terminology characteristic of strategy development and policy-making, notably at the international level.

This paper fllows from early work (Judge, 1971) for Committee on Conceptual and Terminological Analysis (COCTA), originally established within the framework of the International Political Science Association by Fred Riggs [more].

Curiously there has been a spate of interest in prefixes in relation to the development of the English language in response to the technical and behavioural opportunities of cyberspace and the dot.com revolution [more]. This raises question of how conceptual frameworks are engendered to sustain burgeoning mindsets.

is raises question of how conceptual frameworks are engendered to sustain burgeoning mindsets.