Month: April 2020
imperial (adj.)
late 14c., “having a commanding quality,” from Old French imperial, emperial “imperial; princely, splendid; strong, powerful” (12c.), from Latin imperialis “of the empire or emperor,” from imperium “empire” (see empire).
Meaning “pertaining to an empire” (especially Rome’s) is from late 14c.; by 1774 of Britain’s. Meaning “of imposing size or excellence” is from 1731. Imperial presidency in a U.S. context traces to Arthur Schlesinger Jr.’s book on the Nixon administration (1974). Related: Imperially. The noun is from 1520s as “member of the emperor’s party;” 1670s as the name of gold coins issued by various imperial authorities.
argue (v.)
c. 1300, “to make reasoned statements to prove or refute a proposition,” from Old French arguer “maintain an opinion or view; harry, reproach, accuse, blame” (12c.), ultimately from Latin arguere “make clear, make known, prove, declare, demonstrate,” from PIE *argu-yo-, suffixed form of root *arg- “to shine; white.” The transmission to French might be via arguere in a Medieval Latin sense of “to argue,” or from Latin argutare “to prattle, prate,” frequentative of arguere.
De Vaan says arguere is probably “a denominative verb ‘to make bright, enlighten’ to an adj. *argu- ‘bright’ as continued in argutus and outside Italic.” He cites a closely similar formation in Hittite arkuuae- “to make a plea.” Meaning “to oppose, dispute, contend in argument” is from late 14c. Related: Argued; arguing.
salute (n.)
c. 1400, “act of saluting, respectful gesture of greeting, salutation,” from salute (v.). The military sense is from 1690s; specifically of the hand-to-cap gesture from 1832.
salute (v.)
late 14c., “to greet courteously and respectfully,” earlier salue (c. 1300), from Latin salutare “to greet, pay respects,” literally “wish health to,” from salus (genitive salutis) “greeting, good health,” related to salvus “safe” (from PIE root *sol- “whole, well-kept”). The military and nautical sense of “display flags, fire cannons, etc., as a mark of respect” is recorded from 1580s; specific sense of “raise the hand to the cap in the presence of a superior officer” is from 1844.
ARMM Model
ARMM Model
A: Attention (Grabs Attention
R: Response (Elicits emotional response)
M: Meaning (Multiple Meanings that align the brand)
M: Memory (Memorable)
Von Restorff effect
The Von Restorff effect, also known as the “isolation effect“, predicts that when multiple homogeneous stimuli are presented, the stimulus that differs from the rest is more likely to be remembered.[1] The theory was coined by German psychiatrist and pediatrician Hedwig von Restorff (1906–1962), who, in her 1933 study, found that when participants were presented with a list of categorically similar items with one distinctive, isolated item on the list, memory for the item was improved.[2]
The study utilized the isolation paradigm, which refers to a distinctive feature of an item in a list that differs from the others by way of dimension. Such distinctiveness, leading to the von Restorff effect, can be generated from changing the meaningfulness or physical nature of the stimulus in some way, such as in size, shape, color, spacing and underlining.
remedy (v.)
c. 1400, from Old French remedier or directly from Latin remediare, from remedium (see remedy (n.)). Related: Remedied; remedying.
remedy (n.)
c. 1200, “cure for a disease or disorder; means of counteracting an evil,” from Anglo-French remedie, Old French remede “remedy, cure” (12c., Modern French remède) and directly from Latin remedium “a cure, remedy, medicine, antidote, that which restores health,” from re-, intensive prefix (or perhaps literally, “again;” see re-), + mederi “to heal” (from PIE root *med- “take appropriate measures”). Figurative use from c. 1300.
Letters rogatory
Letters rogatory or letters of request are a formal request from a court to a foreign court for some type of judicial assistance. The most common remedies sought by letters rogatory are service of process and taking of evidence.
Taking of evidence[edit]
One reason why a court may require assistance from a foreign court is to obtain evidence from a witness. This evidence may be to answer questions relevant to the determination of an issue of fact, or for disclosure of documents.
Courts usually have the power to subpoena witnesses only from within the jurisdiction of their own legislature unless they are aided by foreign judicial, or sometimes legislative, authority. For example, Alice in the United States, could not summon Jean from France to the US courthouse. Instead, the US court would issue a letter rogatory to a French court, which would then examine Jean in France, and send a deposition back to the requesting court.
Insofar as requests to US courts are concerned, the use of letters rogatory for requesting the taking of evidence has been replaced in large part by applications under 28 USC 1782, or Section 1782 Discovery.
In many cases, the witness is willing to provide the testimony. However, the target court may compel the testimony of a witness who is unwilling to appear.
Conventions[edit]
In the past, letters rogatory could not usually be transmitted directly between the applicable courts, and they had to be transmitted via consular or diplomatic channels, which could make the whole process very slow. There have been various international conventions in regard to service of process and taking of evidence.
One of the earliest conventions to simplify the procedure of letters rogatory was the 1905 Civil Procedure Convention, signed at The Hague. Drafted only in French, it was ratified by only 22 countries. Later conventions, created after the institution of the Hague Conference on Private International Law, which was drafted in both English and French, commanded more support.
The Hague Service Convention, ratified in 1965, enabled designated authorities in each of the signatory states to transmit documents for service to each other, bypassing the diplomatic route. This convention has been ratified by 60 states, including the United Kingdom and the United States, neither of which had ratified the 1905 convention. The Hague Evidence Convention, ratified in 1970, formalised procedures for taking of evidence. It has been ratified by 43 states. For situations exclusively among member states of the European Union, two regulations (1348/2000 and 1206/2001) superseded the two Hague Conventions. The two regulations apply to each of the member states of the European Union with the exception of Denmark, which has opted out.