The paper is based on a strict distinction between the notion of a person referred to by a fictional name, as uttered within a text of narrative fiction, and the notion of a fictional character. The literary functions of such a text require the reader to interpret the occurences of a fictional name as records of utterances of that name by the narrator, referring to that individual which has been assigned that name at the beginning of the chain to which these utterances belong. This, according to the author’s view, provides proper basis also for interpretation of various kinds of extratextual use of fictional names. A literary character is, on the contrary, an element of a construction of a literary work and is identified by a set of requirements (e.g. of the kind mentioned above) imposed by the text’s literary functions on the reader. The author attempts to justify the assumption that the referential function of fictional names so understood is to be interpreted as directed to the actual world (rather than to an artificial world created by the writer), to specify the (rather limited) role reserved for pretense within this approach, to explain the implications of this account of fictional characters for the dispute between realists and anti-realists in this field etc, Článek je založen na striktním rozlišení mezi pojmem osoby, na kterou se odkazuje fiktivní jméno, jak je uvedeno v textu narativní fikce, a pojmem fiktivní povahy. Literární funkce takového textu vyžadují, aby čtenář interpretoval výskyty fiktivního jména jako záznamy o projevech tohoto jména vypravěčem, odkazující na toho jednotlivce, kterému bylo toto jméno přiděleno na začátku řetězce, ke kterému tato slova patří . To podle názoru autora poskytuje náležitý základ i pro interpretaci různých druhů extratextuálního použití fiktivních jmen. Literární charakter je naopak prvek konstrukce literárního díla a je identifikován souborem požadavků (např. Výše zmíněného druhu), které kladou literární funkce textu na čtenáře., and Petr Koťátko
Field tests were carried out to estimate effective unsaturated soil hydraulic properties of layered residual soils in Rio de Janeiro, southeastern Brazil. Data of this type are important for understanding the initiation of rainstorm-induced soil landslides, which often occur in the state of Rio de Janeiro as well as other areas having similar geologic settings and climate conditions. Tests were carried out using a simplified field approach, referred to as the Monitored Infiltration Test, which requires only a tensiometer to measure pressure heads below the wetting front, triggered by flow from a Mariotte bottle which maintains a constant pressure at the top edge of the soil profile. The data can then be analyzed by numerical inversion using the HYDRUS-2D software package. The test is relatively fast since no steady-state flow conditions are needed, and versatile since the test can be carried out quickly on steep slopes with the help of a manual auger. Soil water retention and the unsaturated hydraulic conductivity functions were obtained for a range of young, mature and saprolitic residual soils. The effective hydraulic properties of the distinct residual soil layers can be quite large, reflecting a need to provide a careful analysis of field-scale hydraulic heterogeneity in geotechnical analyses.
The article focuses on the nature of the worlds of narrative fiction, ways of their representation, the status and identity conditions of fictional entities and correlatively on the role of singular terms in literary texts. According to the author, the basic question providing a proper framework for addressing such topics is: what does the reader have to do (to presuppose, to accept, to imagine) in order to allow the text of narrative fiction to fulfil its literary functions? The alternative is to start with the ''text itself'', i.e. sentences with their linguistic meanings (in abstraction from their literary functions), and ask what kind of material does the text provide to the interpreter, what does it enable him/her to identify and determine and what does it leave principially unidentifiable and underdetermined. According to the author, such an approach blocks the access (or makes impossible the return) to the text’s literary functions. The author defends certain specification of the interpretative attitude required by the literary functions of a text of narrative fiction from its reader. Among other things, he attempts to demonstrate its general applicability by analyzing a highly non-standard type of narration (labelled ''radical'')., Příspěvek se zaměřuje na podstatu světů narativní fikce, způsoby jejich reprezentace, stavové a identifikační podmínky fiktivních entit a korelační roli v roli singulárních pojmů v literárních textech. Podle autora je základní otázkou, která poskytuje vhodný rámec pro řešení těchto témat: co musí čtenář udělat (předpokládat, přijmout, představit si), aby text narativní fikce splnil své literární funkce? Alternativou je začít s ,,samotným textem'', tj. Větami s jejich jazykovými významy (v abstrakci z jejich literárních funkcí), a zeptat se, jaký materiál poskytuje text tlumočníkovi, co mu umožňuje identifikovat a určovat a co ponechává zásadně neidentifikovatelné a nedefinované. Podle autora takový přístup blokuje přístup (nebo znemožňuje návrat) k literárním funkcím textu. Autor obhajuje určitou specifikaci interpretačního postoje vyžadovaného literárními funkcemi textu narativní fikce z jeho čtenáře. Mimo jiné se pokouší prokázat svou obecnou použitelnost analýzou vysoce nestandardního typu vyprávění (označeného jako ,,radikál'')., and Petr Koťátko
Fictional objects are sometimes modelled as abstract entities; according to some theories, fictional objects are abstract artefacts, i.e. entities that are created by their authors, while according to some other theories, fictional objects are eternal Platonic entities. Both kinds of theories usually suggest that there are two types of relation between such an abstract object and its properties: to use a well-established nomenclature, a fictional object can be said to exemplify certain properties and encode some other properties. The aim of the present paper is to show that the exemplification vs. encoding distinction is not general enough. This is because it is possible to find properties that a fictional object obviously has in some sense, but it makes no good sense to say that it either exemplifies or encodes them. and Marián Zouhar