本报告探讨外语定量及定性研究中常用软件的使用，首先从定量分析软件SPSS的使用入手，分析数据联系和差异，探讨统计方法的正确选择以及统计结果的解读等，其次，介绍Amos在问卷调查验证性因子分析中的应用实例，最后，本报告拟使用NVivo，探索问卷开放题的编码分析、案例节点的建立，以及质性资料的查询等。

Adam Smith (1723-1790) is widely known for his economic writing and is regarded the world over as the first theorist, and most ardent proponent, of the modern capitalist system. But Smith did not obey the conventions of disciplinary specialization. His non-economic writing and lectures—indeed, the vast majority of his work—focuses on ethics and morality, astronomy, law, history, linguistics, patriotism, the fine arts, and other topics. This talk focuses on Smith’s epistemology, specifically, how it helps explain the historical origins of Literary Studies.

A fundamental aspect of Smith’s theory of knowledge concerns the imagination. According to Smith, our knowledge of the world is riddled with what he calls “gaps.” The philosopher must think creatively in order to make bridges between what appear to be disparate kinds of objects. However, Smith is not making the idealist claim that empirical knowledge is impossible, or that—according to the forms of scholasticism that so bothered the Enlightenment figures of Bacon and Newton—reality is whatever way we merely say or believe that it is. Rather, Smith is making a more complicated claim: we can know the world in ways that are better than what Johnson (contra Berkeley) called “ingenious sophism,” but what is “real” is precisely that which retains “a tendency to absence.” There is always more-than-meets-the-eye in Smith’s theory of knowledge, and it is precisely this empirical vastness—often disruptive and even painful—that solicits new ways of knowing things and acting better.

The first part of this talk will establish the connection in Smith’s work between knowledge, absence, and the quantitative nature of the real, using several key-words from his vast and varied corpus (e.g. “multitude,” “substance,” “work,” “corporeality,” “invisibility,” and “ideas”).

Part two homes in on how Smith proposes to solve the knowledge-numbers-absence enigma, specifically, his reliance on what Althusser calls “the omnipotence genus.” Smith’s knowledge system is above all a genre system. He proposes that we use the imagination to divide objects from each other, as well as put them together, which as has a political-economic analogue in the way he conceived of commercially-based social relations in his most famous book, The Wealth of Nations. Thus, both class and classification are significant here. In the case of the former, the “invisible hand” of the market points to the “majority of laboring men [and women]” whose collective power is erased by individualism and the commodity form; in the latter case, what remains absent to philosophical consideration is another form of “multitude,” this one defined as a similarly paradoxical kind of absent presence, reality with too much variability and at too large a scale to fit within a given genre system.

In part three of the talk I want to propose that we think of genre-making in the same way we think about the history of disciplines: both are ways of organizing our knowledge of the real world according to divisions of kind. Since the most important of the modern disciplines where imagination is concerned is the discipline of “English Literature,” my focus shifts here to its historical origins. Why English, and not—as Franco Moretti proposes—World Literature instead? And why Literature, instead of writing, media, technology, or even “data,” as suggested by the latest disciplinary disruption of the Digital Humanities (and long held within communication studies)? Could we say, again following Moretti, that the origins of literary studies are computational, rather than deeply subjective, individualistic, or other-worldly, as is traditionally assumed in the West? I propose that we think about the discipline of English Literary Studies in both a quantitative and materialist way. With its popularity among the lower orders, the ordinariness of its subject matter, its sheer massiveness both as an object and a generator of multiple kinds of experience, the realist novel is the classic location for explaining how the imagination, absence, and the computational origins of English are intertwined.
因其在经济学领域的写作，亚当·斯密（1723-1790）作为现代资本主义体系第一位理论家和最热烈的支持者广为世人熟知，然而，他涉猎的领域远不止于此。事实上，经济学以外的写作和演讲才是其著作的主体，论题涉及道德伦理、天文、法律、历史、语言学、爱国主义、美术等等。本演讲主要聚焦于斯密的认识论，特别是如何借助这一认识论来解释英语文学研究的历史起源。
想象是斯密知识论的基本概念之一。他认为，我们对这个世界的认知充满了他所谓的“缝隙”（“gaps”）。哲学家应当创新思维，以便在那些看似毫不相干的事物之间建立关联。但是，他并非理想主义地认为经验知识是不可能的，或者现实仅限于我们所说或所相信的那样——后者出自经院哲学，培根和牛顿这些启蒙时期思想家曾深受其扰。相反，斯密的观点更加复杂，他认为我们可以通过比约翰逊（Johnson，而非伯克莱Berkeley）所言的“巧妙的诡辩”更好的方式去认识世界，只不过所谓的“真实”依然“倾向于缺席”（“a tendency to absence”）。斯密的知识论中，总是超越于人们亲眼所见的东西，而正是这种巨大的、具有颠覆性甚至令人痛苦的经验主义，要求人们采用新的方式去认识世界和改善行为。
本演讲的第一部分，将借助若干庞大的斯密语料库中的关键词（如“multitude”“substance”“corporeality”“invisibility”“ideas”），将其有关知识、缺席和真实世界的量性本质的论述联系起来；第二部分将着重分析斯密试图解决“知识-数字-缺席”之谜的方法。斯密的知识体系首先是一种类型系统（genre system），他主张人类运用想象力去进行事物的分类和关联，类型和分类都很重要。在他最著名的《国富论》中，就按照他所设想的基于商业的社会关系建立了一个政治-经济模拟体；在第三部分，我将提议以分类的方式去思考学科的形成史：二者都是根据某种类型去构成我们对真实世界的认知。英语文学研究作为一门学科，我认为应当从计量的（quantitative）和唯物的（materialist）两种角度去加以思考，并以现实主义小说为例加以说明。

This lecture draws on the work of Hannah Arendt and Emmanuel Levinas to outline a theory of the relationship between the literary, ethics and a sense of, and engagement with, the past. The aim of my lecture is to explore the ethical responsibility we might have for the past, for memory, and the significance of the literary in this. To do this, I turn to the work of Hannah Arendt – another thinker marked by the Nazi Holocaust as well as by the philosophy of Martin Heidegger. While Arendt is often seen as a champion of ‘natality’, the constant possibility of newness, she is also deeply engaged with thinking through the past, and our responsibilities towards the past, in order to help us build a shared world in the present. For Arendt, this engagement occurs in (at least) three ways. By exploring the three aspects of Arendt’s thought, I aim to supplement – with history, memory and the past - the kind of account of ethics offered by Levinas.

本讲座借鉴了汉娜·阿伦特（Hannah Arendt）和伊曼纽尔·列维纳斯（Emmanuel Levinas）的著作，概述了文学，伦理学与过去感以及对过去的参与之间的关系理论。 我的演讲目的是探讨我们可能对过去，记忆所承担的道德责任，以及这方面文学的意义。 为此，我开始研究汉娜·阿伦特（Hannah Arendt）的作品，她是一位以纳粹大屠杀以及马丁·海德格尔哲学为标志的思想家。 尽管Arendt经常被视为“新生”的拥护者，新生意味着不断有新事物出现，但她也深切参与过去的思考以及我们对过去的责任，以帮助我们在当今建立一个共同的世界。 对于阿伦特来说，这种参与（至少）以三种方式发生。 通过探索阿伦特思想的三个方面，我的目的是用历史，记忆和过去来补充由列维纳斯所提供的道德解释。

卡尔纳克神庙被誉为世界上最大的露天博物馆，以其规模的恢弘与历史的悠久著称，其多柱厅更以129根巨柱（共134根巨柱，其中5根已倒，只留柱根）的遮天柱让人身临其中肃然起敬。半个世纪以来，埃及学者与考古学者不停在此整理巨柱与墙壁上的浮雕和文字，至今仍未停歇。难道半个多世纪的研究还未将其浮雕和文字穷尽？卡尔纳克圣庙围墙后一百米有道泥砖古墙，穿过厚重的木门来到孟图神庙遗址。阿蒙神崇拜之地伴之以战神孟图神庙遗址，千年的修建与如今的残破在荒凉中透着悠远的神秘。中国考古队的到来让这古老的遗址再现忙碌，人们期待着新的发现，我们已有新的发现。历史如何重现，请您和埃及学者一同沉思！

一直以来，中国与欧洲之间主要通过海铁联运的方式进行贸易交往。伴随“一带一路”建设的推进，中欧班列以其速度快、运距短、安全性高的特点以及安全快捷、绿色环保、受自然环境影响小的优势，逐渐在中欧货物贸易运输中占据重要地位。如何充分发挥中欧班列的作用，带动沿线国家和地区的经济发展日益成为国内外学界关注的焦点。从中欧班列运行中的换轨问题出发，从轨道标准的协调统一切入，我们将探讨标准化如何推动“一带一路”建设走深走实。

We propose a new perspective and a new method to detect accounting frauds out of sample. We show that a logistic regression that directly uses raw accounting data items derived from expert-identified financial ratios as predictors outperforms the traditional logistic regression that uses the expert-identified financial ratios constructed from the same raw data items. Using the same raw data as inputs, ensemble learning, a state-of-the-art machine learning method, further outperforms the logistic regression model. The ensemble learning method also outperforms a support vector machine (SVM) with a financial kernel that maps the same raw accounting data into a broader set of ratios and changes in ratios. Using the performance evaluation metric commonly used for ranking problems, the performance of the ensemble learning model based on the raw data items and most conservative specification is at least seven times as large as the performance of the best ratios-based logistic regression model. Overall, our results suggest that the existing fraud prediction models haven’t fully utilized the information from publicly available financial statement data. In addition, we show that it is possible to extract such useful information by adopting better fraud prediction models that rely on raw accounting data rather than financial ratios as model inputs.

二战前日本的大学参照德国的大学模式，只设置专业教育，没有把通识教育作为其教育内容。战后，日本借鉴美国的高等教育模式，引进了通识教育（一般教育、general education）。在日本1957年制定的大学设立标准中规定，所有大学都应该一律遵循引进通识教育。但对于如何将此适用于那些对通识教育缺乏积极性的大学，从①理念、②教师组织、③教育内容、④与高中的衔接等方面来看都是极其困难的。在经历多次改革和失败之后，日本于1991年删除了大学设立标准中通识教育的相关规定，由各大学自行斟酌如何实施通识教育。从整体上来看虽然通识教育在学分上有减少的趋势，但是作为补习教育的重要性则有所增强。在此过程中，也开始出现在大学三四年级或者研究生阶段实施通识教育的大学。本研究的目的是对在反复摸索与实验中前行的日本通识教育进行考察。

上外法学院“法意讲坛”第三十九讲

一平三端助力混合式“金课”建设

1.PPT教学设计与应用、速课制作和智能导入题库建设

2.利用无线投屏进行信息化教学

3.基于教学大数据进行学生学习过程评价设计和数据分析