著者
曽我 知絵
出版者
九州工業大学
巻号頁・発行日
2010-03-01

九州工業大学博士学位論文 学位記番号:生工博甲第135号 学位授与年月日:平成22年3月24日
著者
清水 建美 近田 文弘 山本 雅道
出版者
信州大学環境問題研究教育懇談会
雑誌
信州大学環境科学論集
巻号頁・発行日
vol.7, pp.81-88, 1985-03-31

This study was supported by the Grant in Aid for Scientific Research of the Nissan Science Promotion Foundation, No. 831-15. A method of environmental monitoring based upon the evaluation of several ecological and geographical characteristics of the components of any local floras was discussed. The characteristics adopted for this purpose are degree of tolerance to the sunshine, size of distribution area,h abit and habitat. In each category,a point was given to every floristic components from the viewpoint of nature conservation, viz. either one of 1 to 5. The frequency distribution of the point in each category and the sum of the points in each category were used as indicators of the environmental naturalness.

1 0 0 0 OA 精巣捻転症

著者
伊藤 秀明 並木 幹夫
出版者
日本思春期学会
雑誌
思春期学 = ADOLESCENTOLOGY (ISSN:0287637X)
巻号頁・発行日
vol.20, no.4, pp.471-474, 2002-12-25

金沢大学医薬保健研究域医学系
著者
馬渡 誠
出版者
京都大學結核研究所
雑誌
京都大學結核研究所紀要 (ISSN:04529820)
巻号頁・発行日
vol.9, no.1, pp.45-50, 1960-09

この論文は国立情報学研究所の学術雑誌公開支援事業により電子化されました。
著者
上林 洋二
出版者
筑波大学文藝・言語学系
雑誌
文藝言語研究. 言語篇 (ISSN:03877515)
巻号頁・発行日
vol.13, pp.51-57, 1988-02
著者
三好 準之助
出版者
京都産業大学
雑誌
京都産業大学論集. 人文科学系列 (ISSN:02879727)
巻号頁・発行日
vol.46, pp.1-28, 2013-03

1.『日本語の和らげ表現 ―語用論的試論―』の構成 1.1.第1 章「言語の和らげ表現」について 1.2.第2 章「日本とは?」について 1.3.第3 章「日本語の和らげ表現」について2.日本語の和らげ表現手段について 2.1.ぼんやり型 2.2.遠回り型 2.3.隠れみの型3.拙著の説明原理の検証 3.1.ポライトネス関連の研究について 3.1.1.ポライトネスの普遍性について 3.1.2.発話の姿勢について 3.1.3.発話行動の協調について 3.2.社会構造の特徴と和らげ表現 3.2.1.中根理論について 3.2.2.相手中心主義の解釈 3.2.3.ウチとソトについて 3.3.日本語のポライトネス研究について 3.3.1.配慮表現について 3.3.2.和らげ表現に関連した研究のいくつか 3.3.3.言語行動と和らげ表現4.和らげ表現研究の今後
著者
劉 建利
出版者
[出版者不明]
巻号頁・発行日
2012

制度:新 ; 報告番号:甲3633号 ; 学位の種類:博士(法学) ; 授与年月日:2012/2/29 ; 早大学位記番号:新5991

1 0 0 0 OA ブタンの分解

著者
金子 正壽
出版者
日本物理化學研究會
雑誌
物理化學の進歩
巻号頁・発行日
vol.16, no.4, pp.153-162, 1942-07-30
著者
武石 恵美子
出版者
法政大学キャリアデザイン学会
雑誌
生涯学習とキャリアデザイン = 生涯学習とキャリアデザイン (ISSN:13493051)
巻号頁・発行日
vol.14, no.1, pp.49-65, 2016-10

Relocation systems that change an employee’sworksite have become increasingly ill-suitedas a diversity strategy attempting to link acorporation’s human-resource diversificationto its worth. This paper aims to shed lightupon the current state of corporate relocation practices and areas of concern through surveys and interviews conducted by the authors. Among employees for whom relocation is a possibility, the ratio of those who actually relocate differs by company. Overall, there is a tendency for relocating employees to bear significant burdens at companies with higher rates of relocation, where the company’s circumstances are prioritized over theemployee’s situation and preferences and thedestination site may relocate the employeea second time to another site in a differentregion. There are many cases among domesticrelocations in which the employee must takea new position with little to no foresight into his or her future, e.g., moving house within a month of receiving official notification, or receiving no indication of how long a new post will last. In recent years, companies have been introducing systems that take employees’ individual situations and preferences into account, such as by permitting employees to request not to be relocated or by using inhouse recruitment or free-agent systems to identify employees who volunteer for transfer; however, these companies are few. Relocation both satisfies the corporate organization’s demand for office expansion as well as accumulates a broad range of experience for human resource development, an area which especially stands to benefit. However, many believe there is no clear difference between employees who have experienced relocation and those who have not. Areas of concern in the years ahead include the necessity of taking individual situation into account and the inevitability of relocation becoming a bottleneck in securing personnel. Yet relocation may expand even further in the years to come, and even though companies recognize that they must give consideration to employees’ situation, it has also become clear that companies at present see no pressing need for radical reform in relocation practices.Companies cannot be said to have a clearawareness of the problem whereby relocationpractices compel employees to take onsignificant burdens. It is necessary to clarifythe current state of relocation practices.