<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<p>The dominance of English in the scientific publishing is
something that we have not mentioned in the discussion so far, and
it is a very substantial fact about scientific communication. I
take the use of other languages on this list as a comment on that
fact.<br>
</p>
<p>Linguistic diversity is a great enricher of human experience, and
I can easily see why one might feel it to be 'malheureuse' that we
can't read scientific literature in our own languages, nor to
participate in this kind of forum. But I myself feel ambivalent
about this.<br>
</p>
I would argue that the scientific discourse per se is inaccessible
to many people, whatever language it is couched in. So it is not
clear to what extent greater linguistic diversity in scientific
publishing would in fact enhance the sharing of knowledge, even if
we went down the route of linguistic fragmentation.<br>
<p>I'd also point out that English, French, Spanish, Italian etc.
have all busily spent the last couple of hundred years imposing
nationalist programmes to destroy the linguistic diversity within
their own borders. From this perspective an effort to publish
papers in Spanish rather than English, for example, often looks
(to me) like a manifestation of two imperial cultures struggling
for dominance, having already carried out a scorched earth policy
in their own territories. <br>
</p>
<p>There are social costs associated with the dominance of English,
but also reasons to celebrate its use as a global language of
scientific communication, and a great enabler of the distribution
of scientific information. But to make sense of the trade-off we
must be able to critique the way that nationalism influences our
view of language and culture. That is a job for:<br>
</p>
<p>- English speakers (to rigorously avoid ascribing the dominance
of English to any merit of the language itself, and to learn other
languages in order to inform their communication with an
international audience)</p>
<p>- speakers of other languages with state support (to disentangle
nationalist agendas from a desire for more effective
communication) <br>
</p>
<p>- speakers of languages that are currently being pushed into
irrelevance or oblivion (to overcome their emotional pain in order
to achieve more effective communication). <br>
</p>
<p>If we do not conduct these critiques, we will be unable to make
sense of the relationship between the hegemony of English and the
dynamic of scientific publication. In my view that is an important
topic, and relevant to our understanding of scientific
information. <br>
</p>
<p>Now you can test the limits of Google Translate if you want (I've
tried to help it!)<br>
</p>
Cymraeg nawr:<br>
<br>
Yn bersonol liciwn i ymdrin â pynciau fel hyn yn y Gymraeg, ond dwi
ddim yn disgwyl ei wneud, hyd yn oed ym Mhrifysgol Cymru. Hefyd,
basa i'n falch yr ymddwyn y sgwrs yn y Gatalaneg. Sut ydyn ni'n
gallu penderfynu pa ieithoedd sy'n cael mynediad i'r clwb
breintiedig sy'n cael eu defnyddio yng nghylchgronau gwyddonol? Beth
bynnag, fel mae'n digwydd dwi'n gallu deall Ffrangeg ag Eidaleg, a
dwi'n hapus braf i ddarllen nhw ar y rhestr yma. Felly dwi ddim yn
wneud sylwadau personol ar neb ar y rhestr.<br>
<br>
Efallai dych chi'm meddwl mod i'n dadlau hwn fel jôc, felly mae'n
werth dweud mod i wedi astudio modiwl ar seicoleg yn y Gymraeg yn y
prifysgol, a chyrsiau PhD yn y Gatalaneg. Does 'na dim problem
gyda'r ieithoedd ei hunain.<br>
<br>
Dai<br>
<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 28/10/16 23:25, Michel Godron wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:a90644de-0fe6-10a5-4abb-26ded045f40e@wanadoo.fr"
type="cite">
<meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
<p>Merci pour cette vision très large de ce qu'est l'économie. <br>
</p>
<p>Au delà de la musique suggérée par Ilya Prigogine, il a
maintenat été montré que l'économie, comme l'écologie, est un
système de gestion de l'information qui donne des réactions pour
maintenir le sytème en équilibre. Malheureusement, cette
démonstration est esquissée en anglais seulement dans <i>Landscape
Ecology</i>. <br>
</p>
<div class="moz-signature">Cordialement. <br>
M. Godron<br>
<br>
<br>
</div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Le 26/10/2016 à 16:07, Francesco
Rizzo a écrit :<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAEvKwyRppJoH3mXfgg_YDKJjZE4UMzAmaX9qK_kn8F_vKZ91Vg@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<meta http-equiv="Context-Type" content="text/html; ">
<div dir="ltr">Caro Mark,
<div>non conosco il pensiero dell'economista che Tu mi
indichi. cercherò di superare questa lacuna. Tuttavia, tra
l'economia e la storia vi è una differenza di fondo:
l'economia è una scienza mediatrice, la storia è una scienza
federatrice. Alla domanda "Che cos'è l'economia?" si può
rispondere in tanti modi. Per me l'economia è un pensiero
che tende a realizzare il massimo risultano col minimo
costo. Anch'io adotto la teoria della probabilità soggettiva
di J. M. Keynes e ritengo che i sistemi economici siano
fondati sui valori normali dal punto di vista soggettivo.
Suggerisco inoltre, come ha fatto Ilya Prigogine, di
assumere il paradigma della musica come base dell'intera
scienza. Compresa quella economica. Tutta la mia vita è
stata dedicata alla ricerca della "Nuova economia". Quindi è
giusto comunicarlo, senza alcuna presunzione o superbia. Ho
inventato davvero una una nuova concezione economica.
Complimenti per la tua capacità comunicativa e auguri.</div>
<div>Un abbraccio.</div>
<div>Francesco</div>
</div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
<div class="gmail_quote">2016-10-26 13:21 GMT+02:00 Mark
Johnson <span dir="ltr"><<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:johnsonmwj1@gmail.com" target="_blank">johnsonmwj1@gmail.com</a>></span>:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote">Dear Jose, Francisco and
Pedro, (Pedro - please could you forward if<br>
the server won't do it?)<br>
<br>
First of all, thank you Jose for pointing out this news
story. It's<br>
interesting to reflect that Alan Sokal's hoax of 1996
(which is<br>
similar) was specifically directed at a discourse which he
deemed to<br>
be unscientific (postmodernism). This one is a nuclear
physics<br>
conference.... and clearly, nobody cares about the science
- this is<br>
about money, status and ego: I'm not sure Sokal could see
the full<br>
extent of this in the 1990s.<br>
<br>
Francisco, I agree with you about not tarring everything
with the same<br>
brush. On the other hand, I think it is important not to
stop asking<br>
fundamental questions, not least "What is economics?".
Even great<br>
economists like Hayek and Von Mises were not convinced
about its<br>
subject matter (they thought it should be "Catallactics" -
the science<br>
of exchange) - and they were even less convinced by the
maths! I do<br>
recommend Tony Lawson's work for a broader perspective on
economic<br>
history.<br>
<br>
Pedro, thank you for a very elegant summary of the
complexities of the<br>
"science system". I like the study of the nature of
information<br>
because, rather like cybernetics, it digs away at the
foundations of<br>
things. There is of course a practical level where we
publish papers<br>
(which few read) and fall asleep (or get drunk) at
conferences (!).<br>
But I am arguing that what we think happens in the
"brownian motion<br>
chamber" of face-to-face communication isn't as
impenetrable as we<br>
might have thought (Bateson got this) , and that it is
profoundly<br>
connected not only to what we do with technology, but to
the<br>
pathologies of communication, marketisation and
inauthenticity that<br>
Sokal and others point to. This partly falls into the
domain of the<br>
phenomenologists (Alfred Schutz is important in covering
this<br>
territory), but also into the domain of artists who
communicate in<br>
powerfully in different kinds of ways. There's more work
to do here.<br>
<br>
As a very speculative contribution to this, I've done one
more video<br>
which is an attempt to summarise my argument and tie it to
an example<br>
of musical communication (a Bach fugue). Alfred Schutz
wrote a<br>
wonderful paper on music called "Making Music Together"<br>
(<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://www.jstor.org/stable/40969255"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://www.jstor.org/stable/<wbr>40969255</a>
- Loet told me about this years<br>
ago, and it's one of the few really great academic papers
I know). I<br>
don't mention Schutz in the video, but I do use John
Maynard Keynes's<br>
remarkable treatise on probability from 1921.<br>
<br>
I argue that at the root of our communication practices
lie<br>
assumptions about 'counting' and 'similarity': we make
assumptions<br>
about things being the same, we count references (but one
reference is<br>
not the same as another!), etc; in scientific practice, we
make<br>
connections between like-observations and causal
explanations - all<br>
the while losing sight of the possibility that it is us
who impose the<br>
order of similarity on things. I've found Keynes's idea of
'negative<br>
analogy' (see video) useful for looking at this
differently, and to<br>
explain the patterns perceived in music. I've found
understanding this<br>
helpful to understand that the "Brownian motion" may also
be like<br>
this. The process depends on multiple descriptions - which
brings<br>
things back to my basic argument for the exploitation of
rich<br>
communications media, etc. I should also say that Loet's
ideas on<br>
mutual redundancy also fit to this perspective, although
there remain<br>
deep questions about Shannon and probability.<br>
<br>
Apologies for the rather crackly sound in parts of the
video, but I<br>
hope at least some of it makes sense (and I hope I didn't
make too<br>
many mistakes playing the Bach fugue!)<br>
<br>
The video is here: <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LeuRlVrTUGU"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://www.youtube.com/watch?<wbr>v=LeuRlVrTUGU</a>
-<br>
"Scientific Communication: From Keynes's Probability
theory to a Bach<br>
Fugue"<br>
<br>
Best wishes,<br>
<br>
Mark<br>
<br>
On 22 October 2016 at 13:18, Jose Javier Blanco Rivero<br>
<div>
<div class="h5"><<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:javierweiss@gmail.com">javierweiss@gmail.com</a>>
wrote:<br>
> Dear Mark,<br>
><br>
> I think this might be of interest for the
discussion<br>
><br>
> <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://www.theguardian.com/science/2016/oct/22/nonsense-paper-written-by-ios-autocomplete-accepted-for-conference"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://www.theguardian.com/<wbr>science/2016/oct/22/nonsense-<wbr>paper-written-by-ios-<wbr>autocomplete-accepted-for-<wbr>conference</a><br>
><br>
> It's a extreme case of economic interest
debunking scientific communication.<br>
> I think it shows a problem of coding between
science and economics. Codes<br>
> disambiguate information processing allowing
differentiation. Frauds like<br>
> these fall in between both codes: they are making
money out of science<br>
> without making science.<br>
><br>
> Best,<br>
><br>
> Javier<br>
><br>
> El oct 21, 2016 9:06 a.m., "Francesco Rizzo" <<a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:13francesco.rizzo@gmail.com">13francesco.rizzo@gmail.com</a>><br>
> escribió:<br>
>><br>
>> Caro Mark e cari tutti,<br>
>> da "Il giudizio di valore" (1972) affermo che
la scienza economica<br>
>> "normale" doveva essere buttata alle ortiche
o nell'immondezzaio, perchè<br>
>> "La scienza non può non essere umana,
civile, sociale, ECONOMI(C)A,<br>
>> enigmatica, nobile, profetica" (2016). Quindi
non mi viene facile leggere<br>
>> taluni rilievi critici che non possono
condividere perché non è giusto fare<br>
>> di tutte le erbe un fascio.<br>
>> Ho rispetto del pensiero degli altri, ma
ritengo sempre opportuno mettere<br>
>> i puntini sulle i.<br>
>> Francesco<br>
>><br>
>> 2016-10-21 14:33 GMT+02:00 Pedro C. Marijuan
<<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:pcmarijuan.iacs@aragon.es">pcmarijuan.iacs@aragon.es</a>>:<br>
>>><br>
>>> Dear Mark and FIS colleagues,<br>
>>><br>
>>> It was a pity that our previous replies
just crossed in time, otherwise I<br>
>>> would have continued along your thinking
lines. However, your alternative<br>
>>> focus on who has access to the "Brownian
chamber motion" is pretty exciting<br>
>>> too.<br>
>>><br>
>>> Following our FIS colleague Howard Bloom
("The Global Brain", 2000),<br>
>>> universities and the like are a social
haven for a new type of personality<br>
>>> that does not match very well within the
social order of things. It is the<br>
>>> "Faustian type" of mental explorers,
dreamers, creators of thought, etc.<br>
>>> Historically they have been extremely
important but the way they are treated<br>
>>> (even in those "havens" themselves!),
well, usually is rather frustrating<br>
>>> except for a few fortunate parties. A
long list of arch-famous scientific<br>
>>> figures ended very badly indeed.<br>
>>><br>
>>> So, in this view, people "called to the
box" are the Faustians of the<br>
>>> locality... But of course, other
essential factors impinge on the box<br>
>>> composition and inner directions, often
very rudely. SCIENTIA POTESTAS EST:<br>
>>> it means that as the box's outcomes are
so much influential in the<br>
>>> technology, religion, culture, richness,
prosperity, and military power,<br>
>>> etc., a mixing of socio-political
interests will impress a tough handling in<br>
>>> the external guidance and inner contents
of the poor box.<br>
>>><br>
>>> And finally, the education --as you have
implied-- that very often is<br>
>>> deeply imbued with classist structures
and class selection. The vitality of<br>
>>> the Brownian box would most frequently
hang from these educational<br>
>>> structures --purses-- for both financing
and arrival of new people. And that<br>
>>> implies further administrative strings
and been involved in frequent<br>
>>> bureaucratic internecine conflicts. The
book of Gregory Clark (2014, The Son<br>
>>> also Raises) is an excellent reading on
class "iron statistics" everywhere,<br>
>>> particularly in education.<br>
>>><br>
>>> E puor si muove! All those burdens have a
balance of positive supporting<br>
>>> and negative discouraging influences,
different in each era. Perhaps far<br>
>>> better in our times, but who knows... The
good thing relating our discussion<br>
>>> is that, from immemorial times, all those
Brownian boxes around are<br>
>>> wonderfully agitated and refreshed by the
external communication flows of<br>
>>> scientific publications via the multiple
channels (explosive ones today,<br>
>>> almost toxic for the Faustian).<br>
>>><br>
>>> Maintaining a healthy, open-minded
scientific system... easy said than<br>
>>> done.<br>
>>><br>
>>> Best regards<br>
>>> --Pedro<br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>> El 16/10/2016 a las 16:07, Mark Johnson
escribió:<br>
>>><br>
>>> Dear Pedro,<br>
>>><br>
>>> Thank you for bringing this back down to
earth again. I would like to<br>
>>> challenge something in your first comment
- partly because contained<br>
>>> within it are issues which connect the
science of information with the<br>
>>> politics of publishing and elite
education.<br>
>>><br>
>>> Your 'bet' that "that oral exchange
continues to be the central<br>
>>> vehicle. It is the "Brownian Motion" that
keeps running and infuses<br>
>>> vitality to the entire edifice of
science." is of course right.<br>
>>> However, there is a political/critical
issue as to who has ACCESS to<br>
>>> the chamber with the Brownian motion.<br>
>>><br>
>>> It is common for elite private schools in
the UK (and I'm sure<br>
>>> elsewhere) to say "exams aren't important
to us. What matters are the<br>
>>> things around the edges of formal
education... character-building<br>
>>> activities, contact with the elite, etc".
What they mean is that they<br>
>>> don't worry about exams because their
processes of pre-selection and<br>
>>> 'hot-housing' mean that all their
students will do well in exams<br>
>>> anyway. But nobody would argue that exams
are not important for<br>
>>> personal advancement in today's society,
would they?<br>
>>><br>
>>> Similarly, elite universities may say
"published papers are not that<br>
>>> important - what happens face-to-face is
what matters!". Those<br>
>>> universities do not have to worry so much
about publishing in<br>
>>> high-quality journals because (often) the
editors of those journals<br>
>>> are employed by those universities. But
when, at least in the last 10<br>
>>> years or so, did anybody get an academic
job in a university with no<br>
>>> publications?<br>
>>><br>
>>> I draw attention to this not because it
seems like a stitch-up<br>
>>> (although it is). It is because it skews
what you call the "Brownian<br>
>>> motion". At worst we end up with the kind
of prejudice that was<br>
>>> expressed by Professor Tim Hunt last year<br>
>>><br>
>>> (<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/jun/10/nobel-scientist-tim-hunt-female-scientists-cause-trouble-for-men-in-labs"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://www.theguardian.com/<wbr>uk-news/2015/jun/10/nobel-<wbr>scientist-tim-hunt-female-<wbr>scientists-cause-trouble-for-<wbr>men-in-labs</a>).<br>
>>> More fundamentally, the doubts and
uncertainties of the many are very<br>
>>> important, and in this system, they are
not only not heard, but in the<br>
>>> increasingly rarefied and and specialised
exchanges in the "Brownian<br>
>>> motion chamber", as the elite scholars
endlessly discuss ontological<br>
>>> arguments for the existence of
information (!), everyone else is<br>
>>> effectively locked-out.<br>
>>><br>
>>> The economic crisis and the economists is
a good example of this kind<br>
>>> of pathology. It was pretty obvious that
the economic system was<br>
>>> heading for trouble quite some time
before 2008; it was also obvious<br>
>>> to a few economists on the fringes (who
became very unpopular) that<br>
>>> economics was in a mess many years
before, concocted out of spurious<br>
>>> mathematical models and a published
discourse which would admit little<br>
>>> else. As Tony Lawson says here (this is
worth watching:<br>
>>> <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b_vMLHis5cE"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://www.youtube.com/watch?<wbr>v=b_vMLHis5cE</a>),
after the crisis it's<br>
>>> easier to claim that economics is in a
mess. But doing something about<br>
>>> it is a different matter.<br>
>>><br>
>>> As a side note about Brownian motion:
Tony Lawson is based in<br>
>>> Cambridge as has, over the last 20 years,
held a bi-weekly seminar<br>
>>> series open to all called the Cambridge
Realist Workshop. Some of the<br>
>>> brightest minds in the University attend
these. They all have deep<br>
>>> discussions about economics, ontology,
society... basically, about<br>
>>> "everyone else". But "everyone else"
isn't in the room.<br>
>>><br>
>>> This is the problem. Were "everyone else"
to be there, for it to be<br>
>>> truly open, honest and democratic.... I
think we would have a better<br>
>>> science of society, information,
education, etc... A small step to<br>
>>> achieving this is to communicate our
doubts in different, more open<br>
>>> and more creative ways.<br>
>>><br>
>>> Best wishes,<br>
>>><br>
>>> Mark<br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>> --<br>
>>> ------------------------------<wbr>-------------------<br>
>>> Pedro C. Marijuán<br>
>>> Grupo de Bioinformación / Bioinformation
Group<br>
>>> Instituto Aragonés de Ciencias de la
Salud<br>
>>> Centro de Investigación Biomédica de
Aragón (CIBA)<br>
>>> Avda. San Juan Bosco, 13, planta X<br>
>>> 50009 Zaragoza, Spain<br>
>>> Tfno. <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="tel:%2B34%20976%2071%203526"
value="+34976713526">+34 976 71 3526</a> (&
6818)<br>
>>> <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:pcmarijuan.iacs@aragon.es">pcmarijuan.iacs@aragon.es</a><br>
>>> <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://sites.google.com/site/pedrocmarijuan/"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://sites.google.com/site/<wbr>pedrocmarijuan/</a><br>
>>> ------------------------------<wbr>-------------------<br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>> ______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
>>> Fis mailing list<br>
>>> <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:Fis@listas.unizar.es">Fis@listas.unizar.es</a><br>
>>> <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-<wbr>bin/mailman/listinfo/fis</a><br>
>>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> ______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
>> Fis mailing list<br>
>> <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:Fis@listas.unizar.es">Fis@listas.unizar.es</a><br>
>> <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-<wbr>bin/mailman/listinfo/fis</a><br>
>><br>
><br>
> ______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
> Fis mailing list<br>
> <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:Fis@listas.unizar.es">Fis@listas.unizar.es</a><br>
> <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-<wbr>bin/mailman/listinfo/fis</a><br>
><br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
</div>
</div>
<span class="">--<br>
Dr. Mark William Johnson<br>
Institute of Learning and Teaching<br>
Faculty of Health and Life Sciences<br>
University of Liverpool<br>
<br>
</span>Visiting Professor<br>
Far Eastern Federal University, Russia<br>
<span class="im HOEnZb"><br>
Phone: 07786 064505<br>
Email: <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:johnsonmwj1@gmail.com">johnsonmwj1@gmail.com</a><br>
Blog: <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://dailyimprovisation.blogspot.com"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://dailyimprovisation.<wbr>blogspot.com</a><br>
<br>
</span>
<div class="HOEnZb">
<div class="h5">______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
Fis mailing list<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:Fis@listas.unizar.es">Fis@listas.unizar.es</a><br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-<wbr>bin/mailman/listinfo/fis</a><br>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
</div>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<br>
<pre wrap="">_______________________________________________
Fis mailing list
<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Fis@listas.unizar.es">Fis@listas.unizar.es</a>
<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis">http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<br>
<pre wrap="">_______________________________________________
Fis mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Fis@listas.unizar.es">Fis@listas.unizar.es</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis">http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">--
-----------------------------------------
Professor David (Dai) Griffiths
Professor of Education
School of Education and Psychology
The University of Bolton
Deane Road
Bolton, BL3 5AB
Office: T3 02
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.bolton.ac.uk/IEC">http://www.bolton.ac.uk/IEC</a>
SKYPE: daigriffiths
UK Mobile +44 (0)7491151559
Spanish Mobile: + 34 687955912
Work: + 44 (0)7826917705
(Please don't leave voicemail)
email:
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:d.e.griffiths@bolton.ac.uk">d.e.griffiths@bolton.ac.uk</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:dai.griffiths.1@gmail.com">dai.griffiths.1@gmail.com</a></pre>
</body>
</html>