The outline

1) Part One: What is the function of the Myth in Existentialism?

What is Myth? ..................................................................................2 What is Existentialism? ..6 What are the functions of Myth? ....................................................11

2) Part Two: The function of the Myth of Prometheus in Existentialism..14

Aeschylus, Echebbi, Goethe and Lord Byron.

3) Notes........................................................................................184) Work cited.19

Part One: What is the function of Myth in Existentialism? What is Myth? From the Greek mythos, myth means story or word. As stories or narratives, myths articulate how characters undergo or enactan ordered sequence of events. The term myth has come to refer to a certain genre of stories that share characteristics that make this genre distinctly different from other genres of oral narratives, such as legends and folktales. Many definitions of myth repeat similar general aspects of the genre and may be summarized thus: Myths are symbolic tales of the distant past that concern cosmology (i.e. the origin and nature of the universe), may be connected to belief systems or rituals, and may serve to direct social action and values. In William Bascoms article The Forms of Folklore: Prose Narratives, the classic definition of myth from folklore studies finds clearest delineation where myths are defined as tales believed as true, usually sacred, set in the distant past or other worlds or parts of the world, and with extra-human, inhuman, or heroic characters(1). Such myths, often described as cosmogonic, or origin myths, function to provide order or cosmology, based on cosmic from the Greek kosmos meaning order. Cosmologys concern with the order of the universe finds narrative, symbolic expression in myths, which thus often help to establish important values or aspects of a cultures worldview. For many people, myths remain value-laden discourse that explains much about human nature. Myth has also been defined by Rollo May as:" a way of making sense in a senseless world. Myths are narrative patterns that give significance to our existence. Whether the meaning of existence is only what we put into life by our own individual fortitude, as Sartre would hold, or whether there is a meaning we need to discover, as Kierkegaard would state, the result is the same: myths are our way of finding this meaning and significance."(2). Myths, furthermore, and even some biblical stories like those about Adam and Eve, are not meant to be taken literally but rather to convey in symbolic language the origins of the basic truths and assumptions of a particular culture in terms of its own history and experience. Nevertheless, as the mythologist, Joseph Campbell, reminds us: "The fundamental themes of mythological thought have remained constant and universal, not only throughout history, but also over the whole extent of mankind's occupation of the earth."(3) Myth is to be understood as the narration of a primordial experience, not necessarily personal but rather, transcendental; not something invented for the sake of entertainment, though it may be also that, but rather, a living and burning reality that exists in the psyche and culture of a people. A myth deals with the existential world as well as with eternal experiences. Existence on these two levels contains past, present, and future within its structure. A Myth, then, lives outside temporal time. It flows in a cyclical, sacred, or eternal dimension. Myth-time is reversible. For instance, the events narrated in the Prometheus myth are perpetual; they were understood by the ancient Greeks according to their cultural canon, by men of the middle ages in terms of their concepts, and so on. In that the myth reveals and relives "the structure of reality." It may then become the model or the prototype of the period or periods that brought it into being, and it reflects in its many transformations and recounting throughout the centuries the needs, obsessions, and longings of the individual cultures. Myths cannot be understood merely on an intellectual level if they are to be experienced fully. In fact, they not only stir us with their poetry, their images, but with their praxis, their action in the everyday world. The myth may give energy to a hero, to an entire culture. Each culture has its own myths, which are frequently adaptations of others. The popularity of certain myths at particular stages in civilization explains the needs and deficiencies as well as the positive attributes of the society. While defining the notion of Myth, there are a number of general conceptual frameworks involved. To begin with, Myths are Cosmogonic Narratives, connected with the Foundation or Origin of the Universe. Myths are Narratives of a Sacred Nature, often connected with some Ritual. Myths are often foundational or key narratives associated with religions. These narratives are believed to be true from within the associated faith system, though sometimes that truth is understood to be metaphorical rather than literal. Within any given culture there may be sacred and secular myths coexisting. Myths are Narratives Representative of a Particular Epistemology orWay of Understanding Nature and Organizing Thought. For example, structuralism recognizes paired collections of opposites or dualities, like light and dark, as central to myths. In this same encounter, there have been many other implications attributed to myth. As illustration, they are often highly valued or disputed stories that still intrigue us even though many of us do not recognize them as a living genre in our culture. As McDowell's definition indicates, myths often involve extraordinary characters or episodes that seem impossible in our world, but "the extraordinary feats and traits of mythic protagonists are possible only because they attach to a primary and formative period in the growth and development of civilization"(4); thus their various aspects or dimensions are best considered as organically intertwined. In fact the contemporaryconnotation of myth as "a falsehood", often understood as being in opposition to science, probably emanates from recognition of this attribute of myth in isolation. Myths also seem in opposition to science because they are not testable, which is the case because of their primordial setting; if events described are from a different, earlier world, then of course they would not be repeatable or logical in our world. One cannot deny that the characteristics which enable to shed light on the mythic genre of stories are various, among them: a myth is a story in which characters are often non-human such as gods, goddesses, supernatural beings. Moreover, setting is a previous proto-world.Plot may involve interplay between worlds (i.e. this world and previous or original world). Eventually, Myth does not only bring forward cosmogonic or metaphysical explanation of universe, but also evokes the presence of Mystery; the Unknown, means having a sacred tone. Demythologized, myth ceases to be about the world and turns out to be about the human experience of the world. Demythologized, myth ceases to be an explanation at all and becomes an expression, an expression of what it feels like to live in the world. Myth ceases to be merely primitive and becomes universal. It ceases to be false and becomes true. It depicts the human condition. Taken literally, myth, as a personalistic explanation of the physical world, is incompatible with science and is therefore unacceptable to moderns. Once demythologized, however, myth is compatible with science because it now refers at once to the transcendent, nonphysical world and, even more, to humans' experience of the physical one.

What is Existentialism? Existentialism is a philosophical movement that views human existence as having a set of underlying themes and characteristics, such as anxiety, dread, freedom, awareness of death, and consciousness of existing. Existentialism is also an outlook, or a perspective, on life that pursues the question of the meaning of life or the meaning of existence. It is this question that is seen of great importance, above both scientific and other philosophical pursuits. Existentialism is in fact oriented toward two major themes, on the one hand the analysis of human existence and on the other hand the centrality of human choice. Its chief theoretical energies are thus devoted to questions about ontology and decision. It traces its roots to the writings of Soren Kierkegaard and Friedrich Nietzsche. As a philosophy of human existence, existentialism found its best 20th-century exponent in Karl Jaspers; as a philosophy of human decision, its foremost representative was Jean-Paul Sartre. In fact, Sartre finds the essence of human existence in freedom, in the duty of self-determination and the freedom of choice, and therefore spends much time describing the human tendency toward bad faith, reflected in humanity's perverse attempts to deny its own responsibility and flee from the truth of its inescapable freedom. In simple terms, Existentialism tells that you have born into a meaningless absurd world which you have not created and you can not change that world either by your actions. So your journey would not be a happy and smooth. You have to live through the existential pains until you die. The best metaphor I can suggest for this situation is that you started your dream as soon as you born. You can not control the course of events in that dream and the alarm bell rings when you die. Existentialism encompasses so many different trends and ideas that have appeared over the history of Western philosophy, thus making it difficult to distinguish it from other movements and philosophical systems. Due to this, one useful means of understanding existentialism is to examine what it isn't. For one thing, existentialism doesn't argue that the "good life" is a function of things like wealth, power, pleasure, or even happiness. This is not to say that existentialists reject happiness, existentialism is not a philosophy of masochism, after all. However, existentialists will not argue that a person's life is good simply because they are happy; a happy person might be living a bad life while an unhappy person might be living a good life. The reason for this is that a life is "good" for existentialists insofar as it is "authentic." Existentialists may differ somewhat on just what is needed for a life to be authentic, but for the most part this will involve being conscious of the choices one makes, taking full responsibility for those choices, and understanding that nothing about one's life or the world is fixed and given. Existentialism is also not caught up in the idea that everything in life can be made better by science. That doesn't mean that existentialists are automatically anti-science or anti-technology; rather, they judge the value of any science or technology based upon how it might affect a person's ability to live an authentic life. If science and technology help people avoid taking responsibility for their choices and help them pretend that they are not really free, then existentialists will argue that this will be a serious problem. Existentialists also reject both the arguments that people are good by nature but are ruined by society or culture, and that people are sinful by nature but can be helped to overcome sin through proper religious beliefs. Yes, even Christian existentialists tend to reject the latter proposition. The reason is that existentialists, especially atheist existentialists, reject the idea that there is any fixed human nature to begin with, whether good or evil. There are several philosophical positions all related to existential philosophy but the main identifiable common proposition, is that existence precedes essence. By this, existentialism states that man exists and in that existence man defines himself and the world in his own subjectivity, and wanders between choice, freedom, and existential angst. The first philosopher to use the term was Soren Kierkegaard (1813 - 1855), who reacted against systematic rational philosophy, especially Hegel, and grasped the notion of a truth inside of the evolving self. Deriving from this stress on existence there are other main subjects and images that have been developed by the existentialists. Starting with Becoming a Being (i.e. existential ontology): We are what we can become. Our becoming is our ontological possibility of becoming. Human existence is a project, in which past and present are subordinate to future, is the main residence of our existence. Human existence cannot have a relationship with being unless it remains in the midst of nothingness.(5)

Moreover, there is also Nothingness that appears in existentialism, as the placeholder of the possibility. The awareness of anything in the world that is not my own existence is an awareness of nothingness. Then, we arrive from nothingness to Absurd at the moment that we ask for a meaning after we have become aware of the other. Absurd is a motive in existentialism, especially in Sartre and Camus. It is sometimes possible to overcome absurd, with absurd itself, as Camus says in The Myth of Sisyphus: "The struggle itself toward the heights is enough to fill a man's heart. One must imagine Sisyphus happy."(6)

At the end we come to the notion of Choice which brings forward the term Angst. We always have a choice. Existentialism does not stand for any kind of determinism except the one that determines our individual facts (i.e. existence). We choose, and in choosing, in good or bad faith, we define ourselves. Choice is a definition of an existence in the world, towards an object outside of itself.Choice is all that we have, without confirmation of our act; we never know what was right to choose. The doubt of our acts, together with the contingence of existence, leads to the notion of angst which is the main characteristic of existence itself, when we face our contingence, and the absurdity of our acts and choices. For Heidegger, it is that through which fear becomes possible. For Kierkegaard is a desire for what one fears. For Sartre, it is the immediate consequence of facing the possibility of nothingness. The Danish philosopher Soren Kierkegaard (1813-1855), the "father of existentialism," asserted that "truth is subjectivity"; human beings can be understood only from the inside, in terms of their lived and experienced reality and dilemmas, not from the outside, in terms of a biological, psychological, or other scientific theory of human nature. Existentialism emphasizes action, freedom, and decision as fundamental to human existence and is fundamentally opposed to the rationalist tradition. More generally it rejects all of the Western rationalist definitions of Being in terms of a rational principle or essence or as the most general feature that all existing things share in common. Existentialism tends to view human beings as subjects in an indifferent, objective, often ambiguous, and "absurd" universe in which meaning is not provided by the natural order, but rather can be created, however provisionally and unstably, by human beings' actions and interpretations. Human beings are exposed to or, to use the philosopher Martin Heidegger's phrase, "thrown" into, existence. Existentialists consider being thrown into existence as prior to, and the horizon or context of, any other thoughts or ideas that humans have or definitions of themselves that they create. This is part of the meaning of the assertion of the philosopher Jean-Paul Sartre, one of the founders of existentialism, "existence is prior to essence." Existentialism conceives of Being itself as something that can only be understood through and in relation to these basic characteristics of human existence. Sartre, in "Essays in Existentialism", further highlights this consciousness of being thrown into existence in the following fashion. " First of all, man exists, turns up, appears on the scene, and, only afterwards, defines himself If man, as the existentialist conceives him, is indefinable, it is because at first he is nothing. Only afterward will he be something, and he himself will have made what he will be". (7) As a conclusion, Existentialism asserts that the fact of human existence must always be counted as more important than any philosophical theory. Central to existentialist philosophy is human freedom and the responsibility that individuals have for creating their own destinies through an authentic engagement with the reality of their individual selves and the environment that surrounds them.

What are The Functions of Myth?

Myth by nature depicts a time period that is usually a remote past, in which gods and goddesses are the chief characters. A myth usually points to an unknown transcendental reality in a symbolic form. It has a tremendous psychological impact on the listeners as it makes the listeners almost believe that those things really happened. A vague of doubts still haunts the functions of Myth. In fact, the functions of myth can be divided into two: there is the positive function as well as the negative one. As for the first function, it has to facilitate the development of new states of mind. A myth has many roles embedded in it. The purpose of these roles is that they allow the person, by adopting particular ones that he needs, to gain the experience that he seeks. He adopts a particular role by identifying with it. Identification is always with a role within a myth. The importance of identification is this: Only identification brings experience. For instance, if we want to experience some aspect of life, then we first have to identify with a role that can bring us that experience. A particular myth will develop suitable (for that myth) attitudes and beliefs in us. So in order to develop an attitude that we need, we have to identify with a role within a myth that allows for the expression of that attitude. When identification is broken but we still seek to live a mythic life, then nihilism and meaninglessness arise. Dealing with the negative function: myth allows the person to live his life on automatic pilot. This occurs once the roles within the myth have become stereotyped. The person still makes decisions within his role, but these decisions are part of the myth. Hence in reality there is little exercise of free will: once a person chooses a myth, and then a role within it, so everything else can follow automatically. Since the myth is usually chosen subconsciously, so the persons exercise of freewill within the myth is often illusive. The limitation of living a myth is that the person functions in a role without having much understanding of why that role is chosen, or its purpose. The person has little understanding of his place in life and little understanding of the purpose of his life. So the central criticism of mythical living is that the person has no real awareness of what he is doing. Joseph Campbell was a writer and teacher, who detailed what all religions and mythologies have in common, declared in Creative Mythology, that mythology, that is the stories representing the traditions and spiritual beliefs of any culture or religion, serves not one but four functions: 1/ The religious or spiritual function: a myth is meant to make people experience the powerful feeling of the divine in their lives. As Campbell puts it, a "living mythology" will "waken and maintain in the individual an experience of awe, humility, and respect, in recognition of that ultimate mystery, transcending names and forms, from which words turn back. (8) 2/ The Cosmological function: As Campbell writes, "is to render a cosmology, an image of the universe."(9). This might include how things like time, space, and biology work and are organized; for example, how the world and its creatures came to be and how long that took, or how they changed over time, where heaven and hell and the Garden of Eden are, and what the universe is made of. 3/ The Social Function: Campbell defines this function of myth-telling as "the validation and maintenance of an established order."(10). Myth supports and validates the specific moral order of the society out of which it arose. Particular life-customs of this social dimension, such as ethical laws and social roles. Myth expresses and confirms, rather than explains or questions, the sources of cultural attitudes and values. Because myth anchors the present in the past it is a sociological charter for a future society which is an exact replica of the present one. 4/The Psychological Function: This is the aspect of mythology where stories symbolize important points in an individual's life, with the purpose of "the centering and harmonization of the individual." (11). As an example, Freud, with his Oedipal complex, was one who explicitly connected myths with life paths. Of course, most stories speak to us as individuals exactly to the extent that we see ourselves in them. Therefore, the psychological function seems much more comfortable with than the social aspect of myth, Campbell affirmed: "Since in the world of time every man lives but one life, it is in himself that he must search for the secret of the Garden." In other words, stories that help us to look for life answers and guidance within ourselves, and to understand our own narratives with the help of their symbolism, are tapping into a valid source: one's self, which happens to contain the entire universe anyway. To sum up, myths have various functions that may differ from one perspective to another. They explain natural, social, cultural and biological facts through narratives which it claims to have happened in the past. They try to answer various questions raised by people, like, 'from where does the world come in to being? Who or what is its cause? What is the purpose of life? Why should living things die?' etc .They also play an authoritative role by offering teachings about the origin of the world, end of the world etc. And finally, in traditional societies myth has an educational value, it was used to introduce or stress a particular moral value.

Part two: The Function of the Myth of Prometheus in Existentialism. The 19th century saw the growth of national identities all over Europe and liberated peoples looked for a common cultural tradition to express their new sense of community. The mechanism by which this was most frequently achieved, `Invented Tradition', drew heavily on myth. I propose to examine the Prometheus myth within this context to show how it fulfils the function of myth as definition of identity both for a national group, and on an interlinked level, for individuals. Prometheus represents the archetype of the defiant, rebellious and gigantically ambitious type who refuses to submit to the existing structure and thus to destiny. . . . The testing of his values helped him transcend his individual needs and wishes. He saw beyond his immediate situation and realized during his ordeal that he was dealing with collective wills and factors that would be instrumental later in his reintegration into the pantheon of gods. In the end, Prometheus is the child grown into man -- the "would be" artist has become the artist "who is."(12). The myth of Prometheus as it appears in our earliest sources, Hesiod and Aeschylus with which I am concerned, defines human identity. It associates mankind with a rebellious Titan who steals fire from the gods and is punished for his theft by the ruling deity; it also establishes man in his place (i.e. on earth), where he must struggle to survive. Prometheus' gift of fire is part of the conceptual framework of the progress of mankind, enabling technology, learning and everything that `civilization' implies. The myth was constantly reworked throughout antiquity and after, it proved extremely flexible and adaptable due to its inherently ambiguous content, apparent in the Aeschylus version. In Aeschylus' play the emphasis is on different consequences of Prometheus' actions, namely his own punishment, nailed to the rocks of the Caucasus, and the fact that through him man obtains all the benefits of civilization. The function of myth and of mythmaking is essentially the same at any time, and we continue today in the tradition of constructing myths for ourselves, whether we call them propaganda, advertising or historiography. The promethean myth continued to fulfill its function of self-definition for man, charting his place in the world, his aspirations and the obstacles in the way of his attaining perfection. Prometheus is the bringer of fire to humankind. He is humanitys benefactor. The only one of the gods who has any concern for mortals other than as a source of amusement or the next sacrifice, Prometheus takes an acute interest in human lives. He gives them gift after gift, starting with the ability to think abstractly, and moving through most of the developments of early human civilization (13) Prometheus clearly represents all that makes us essentially human. His name of "forethought" is so evocative. Forethought requires: memory, intelligence and imagination. Without these we would be little more than apes. Also, the fact he bought man "fire" is so profound. Fire is light, heat and comfort in the dark. Spiritually it represents enlightenment, the word of god, etc. All this comes from Prometheus. But, in order to bring such solace, one should suffer; suffer in order to bring light to his inner darkness. In Prometheus's case, fire and lightning indicate intuition. Hence, Prometheus had given man the most potent of all instruments: fire as a source of infinite energy and power that could transform matter and elements. Fire was so powerful a force that it could not be touched. Fire is equally powerful as cognition. Aeschylus influenced the entirety of the modern world by refining the Prometheus myth from its origins in Hesiod into a play and a god that have captured the imaginations of authors for centuries, and by forever defining in Prometheus a human-loving god, and a fearless rebel. Aeschylus advanced Greek tragedy in his use of literary forms, as seen in Prometheus Bound, primarily in his addition of multiple actors to the tradition. The themes of the play apply even today, and have influenced human social and political development. Without Aeschylus and his Prometheus Bound, the literary tradition would be lacking, and the whole of Western civilization would be poorer. In the context of comparative Myth, the two most prominent aspects of the Prometheus myth; the creation of man from clay and the theft of fire; have found their expression in numerous cultures throughout history and around the world. Lord Byrons poem Prometheus portrays the titan as unrepentant. His address centralizes Prometheus and sings his praise, alluding in the background to Zeus, relegates him, minimizes him, to better handle the worth, courage, noble deed of Mans creator and the attributes of light which render life meaningful for humanity(14). For the Romantics, Prometheus was the rebel who resisted all forms of institutional tyranny epitomized by Zeus, church, monarch and patriarch. In his rewriting, Byron retrieved the scenic representation; he showed us Prometheus who had already stolen the fire. We begin at the heart of suffering. Thus, humanity had the chance to have the fire. In Johann Wolfgang Goethes Prometheus, Nature was at the center of his interests because it seemed endless and ever-growing. He was also fascinated with the relationship between human being and the universe regarding the human being as part of a greater sense of being. He wanted for the world to move forward yet not forget about traditions and history. His poem translates the myth into the human, recuperates the basics to better accentuate them in a form of confrontation between two single actors: Prometheus/Man vs. all forms of hate/cruelty embodied in Zeus (15). Furthermore, in Echebbis Nachidu Al Jabbar, space has a connotative dimension. For instance, the position of the eagle high in the sky is associated with freedom. The placing of the space high from the beginning will help Echebbi to posit himself far from human beings, but also down from being God. Hence, he tries to imitate Prometheus and he will come back with those things that are unspoken in Prometheus. By making the unspoken speak Echebbi reveals the good side of the eagle. Placing himself between the skies (i.e. the fate) and the earth (i.e. the enemy), Echebbi is fighting all. In Echebbi or Byrons poems, there is this moment of collapse between the two moments of presence and of absence into a deliberate sameness. This sense of sameness enables the poetic subject to reject the present, to recuperate the past for reflective repositioning in search for self knowledge. We speak here of a new text which will retrieve the traces of presence as absence. To end up with the idea of Palimpsest, which is central in the field of comparative study, we need to have an old text that will be erased and on which we write new text, it bares traces of the original text. A text is always read as double, it always contains the traces of another text. In fact, the three poems provided the repetition of the origin story within a structure of difference (i.e. the sameness which is not the same). Each poet retrieves that which he wants to highlight. In the case of Echebbi, he is rewriting and not imitating as imitation will exclude the aspect of innovation. To conclude, some Existentialists states that myth is of continued importance and not an obsolete, historical artifact. Specifically, myth embodies the prereflective life-world, which is increasingly displaced by the modern technological culture. Major Existentialists make use of Myth, including figures such as Prometheus, Sisyphus or Don Juan in their writings. They consider myth as narrative intended to help present human Existence. Mythical narratives frequently offer a useful vehicle for the representation of prereflective existence. Thus, myth is not to be seen as a source of authority or reverence, but rather as an exemplary narrative embodying the typical universal of the human condition.

1Dhaoui Ines

19Dhaoui InesNotes(1) Bascom, William. The Forms of Folklore: Prose Narratives in Journal of American Folklore 78, 1965: 3-20. (2) May, Rollo. The Cry for Myth, 1991, p. 15 (3) Campbell,Joseph. Myths To Live By, Bantam, 1988, p. 19(4)McDowell, John. From "Perspectives" on "What is Myth" in Folklore Forum, vol. 29, no. 2, 1998. (5) Heidegger, Martin. Was ist Metaphysik? (1929).(6) Camus, Albert. The Myth of Sisyphus. Le Mythe de Sisyphe (1942; English translation 1955).(7) Sartre, Jean-Paul. Existentialism and The Human Emotions, trans. Bernard Frechtman (Secaucus, NJ: Carol Publishing Group, 1957), 15.(8)Campbell, Joseph. Creative Mythology.p609(9)Campbell, Joseph. Creative Mythology.p611(10)Campbell, Joseph. Creative Mythology.p621(11)Campbell, Joseph. Creative Mythology.p623(12) Knapp, Bettina L. The Prometheus Syndrome. New York, 1979.(13)Aeschylus. Prometheus Bound. Trans. David Grene. Classical Tragedy Greek and Roman. Ed. Robert W. Corrigan. New York: Applause, 1990. (14)- (15) Master: Cross Cultural Poetics. Comparative Literature Course. Poetry, the poet and the regenerative transformations.2009.

Work citedAeschylus. Prometheus Bound. Trans. David Grene. Classical Tragedy Greek and Roman. Ed. Robert W. Corrigan. New York: Applause, 1990. Bascom, William. The Forms of Folklore: Prose Narratives in Journal of American Folklore 78, 1965: 3-20. Camus, Albert. The Myth of Sisyphus. Le Mythe de Sisyphe (1942; English translation 1955).Campbell, Joseph. Creative Mythology: The Masks of God(4 vols; New York: Arkana 1991).Campbell, Joseph. Myths To Live By, Bantam, 1988, p. 19Campbell, Joseph. Occidental Mythology. 1964. New York: Penguin Compass, 1991. Heidegger, Martin. Was ist Metaphysik? (1929).Knapp, Bettina L. The Prometheus Syndrome. New York, 1979.Master: Cross Cultural Poetics. Comparative Literature Course. Poetry, the poet and the regenerative transformations. 2009.May, Rollo. The Cry for Myth, 1991, p. 15 McDowell, John. From "Perspectives" on "What is Myth" in Folklore Forum, vol. 29, no. 2, 1998. Sartre, Jean-Paul. Existentialism and The Human Emotions, trans. Bernard Frechtman (Secaucus, NJ: Carol Publishing Group, 1957), 15.Sartre, Jean-Paul. Essays in Existentialism. Edited by Wade Baskin. New York: Kensington Publishing Corp, 1993.