A park is an area of natural, semi-natural or planted space set aside for human enjoyment and recreation or for the protection of wildlife or natural habitats. Urban parks are green spaces set aside for recreation inside cities. National parks and country parks are green spaces used for recreation in the countryside. State parks and provincial parks are administered by sub-national government agencies. Parks may consist of grassy areas, rocks and trees, but may contain buildings and other artifacts such as monuments, fountains or playground structures. Many parks have fields for playing sports such as baseball and football, paved areas for games such as basketball. Many parks have trails for walking and other activities; some parks are built adjacent to bodies of water or watercourses and may comprise a beach or boat dock area. Urban parks have benches for sitting and may contain picnic tables and barbecue grills; the largest parks can be vast natural areas of hundreds of thousands of square kilometers, with abundant wildlife and natural features such as mountains and rivers.

In many large parks, camping in tents is allowed with a permit. Many natural parks are protected by law, users may have to follow restrictions. Large national and sub-national parks are overseen by a park ranger. Large parks may have areas for canoeing and hiking in the warmer months and, in some northern hemisphere countries, cross-country skiing and snowshoeing in colder months. There are amusement parks which have live shows, fairground rides and games of chance or skill. English deer parks were used by the aristocracy in medieval times for game hunting, they had walls or thick hedges around them to keep game animals in and people out. It was forbidden for commoners to hunt animals in these deer parks; these game preserves evolved into landscaped parks set around mansions and country houses from the sixteenth century onwards. These may have served as hunting grounds but they proclaimed the owner's wealth and status. An aesthetic of landscape design began in these stately home parks where the natural landscape was enhanced by landscape architects such as Capability Brown.

The French formal garden is an elaborate example. As cities became crowded, the private hunting grounds became places for the public. Early opportunities for the creation of urban parks in both Europe and the United States grew out of medieval practice to secure pasturelands within the safe confines of villages and towns; the most famous US example of a city park evolved from this practice is the Boston Commons in Boston, Massachusetts. With the Industrial revolution parks took on a new meaning as areas set aside to preserve a sense of nature in the cities and towns. Sporting activity came to be a major use for these urban parks. Areas of outstanding natural beauty were set aside as national parks to prevent their being spoiled by uncontrolled development. Park design is influenced by the intended purpose and audience, as well as by the available land features. A park intended to provide recreation for children may include a playground. A park intended for adults may feature walking paths and decorative landscaping.

Specific features, such as riding trails, may be included to support specific activities. The design of a park may determine, willing to use it. Walkers might feel unsafe on a mixed-use path, dominated by fast-moving cyclists or horses. Different landscaping and infrastructure may affect children's rates of park usage according to gender. Redesigns of two parks in Vienna suggested that the creation of multiple semi-enclosed play areas in a park could encourage equal use by boys and girls. Parks are part of the urban infrastructure: for physical activity, for families and communities to gather and socialize, or for a simple respite. Research reveals that people who exercise outdoors in green-space derive greater mental health benefits. Providing activities for all ages and income levels is important for the physical and mental well-being of the public. Parks can benefit pollinators, some parks have been redesigned to accommodate them better; some organizations, such as the Xerces Society are promoting this idea.

City parks play a role in improving cities and improving the futures for residents and visitors - for example, Millennium Park in Chicago, Illinois or the Mill River Park and Green way in Stamford, CT. One group, a strong proponent of parks for cities is The American Society of Landscape Architects, they argue that parks are important to the fabric of the community on an individual scale and broader scales such as entire neighborhoods, city districts or city park systems. Parks need to feel safe for people to use them. Research shows that perception of safety can be more significant in influencing human behavior than actual crime statistics. If citizens perceive a park as unsafe, they might not make use of it at all. A study done in four cities. There are a number of features. Elements in the physical design of a park, such as an open and welcoming entry, good visibility, appropriate lighting and signage can all make a difference. Regular park maintenance, as well as programming and community involvemen

Indo-Semitic languages

The Indo-Semitic hypothesis maintains that a genetic relationship exists between Indo-European and Semitic and that the Indo-European and the Semitic language families descend from a prehistoric language ancestral to them both. The theory has never been accepted by contemporary linguists in modern times, but it has had a number of supporting advocates and arguments in the 19th and 20th centuries; the term "Indo-Semitic" was first used by a leading advocate of this relationship. Although this term has been used by a number of scholars since, there is no universally accepted term for this grouping at the present time. In German the term indogermanisch-semitisch,'Indo-Germanic–Semitic', has been used, in which indogermanisch is a synonym of "Indo-European". Several phases in the development of the Indo-Semitic hypothesis can be distinguished. In a first phase, a few scholars in the 19th century argued that the Indo-European languages were related to the Semitic languages; the first to do so was Johann Christoph Adelung in his work Mithridates.

However, the first to do so in a scientific way was Richard Lepsius in 1836. The arguments presented for a relationship between Indo-European and Semitic in the 19th century were rejected by Indo-Europeanists, including W. D. Whitney and August Schleicher; the culmination of this first phase in Indo-Semitic studies was Hermann Möller's comparative dictionary of Indo-European and Semitic, first published in Danish in 1909. A succinct history of the Indo-Semitic hypothesis is provided by Alan S. Kaye in a review of Allan Bomhard's Toward Proto-Nostratic: A proposed relationship between Indo-European and Semitic goes back some 125 years to R. von Raumer. I. Ascoli who, after examining many items, declared in 1864 that these language families were genetically related. However, A. Schleicher denied the relationship. Scholars waited for a systematic study of IE-Semitic vocabulary until 1873, when F. Delitzsch published his Studien über indogermanisch-semitische Wurzelverwandtschaft. C. Abel's 400-page dictionary of Egyptian-Semitic-IE roots appeared in 1884.

Work by 20th century linguists who have investigated the problem more with Afro-Asiatic and/or Semitic data include H. Möller, A. Cuny, L. Brunner, C. Hodge, S. Levin, A. Dolgopol′skij, V. M. Illič-Svityč, K. Koskinen. In the mid-19th century, Friedrich Müller argued that the Semitic languages were related to a large group of African languages, which he termed Hamitic; this implied Indo-European -- Hamito-Semitic. However, the concept of Hamitic was flawed, relying in part on racial criteria rather than linguistic ones. In 1950, Joseph Greenberg showed that the Hamitic grouping needed to be split up, with only some of the languages it concerned groupable with Semitic, he named this modified grouping Afroasiatic. In principle Indo-European—Hamito-Semitic was replaced by Indo-European—Afroasiatic. However, Greenberg argued that the relevant question was not whether Indo-European was related to Afroasiatic but how it was related. Did the two form a valid node in a family tree of languages, or were they only more distantly related, with many other languages in between?

Since the 1980s, adherents of the controversial Nostratic hypothesis, who accept a relationship between Indo-European and Afroasiatic, have begun to move away from the view that Indo-European and Afroasiatic share an close relationship, to consider that they are only related at a higher level. Although it might seem that the logical connection to pursue was that between Indo-European and Hamito-Semitic or Indo-European and Afroasiatic, in practice scholars interested in this comparison continued to compare Indo-European and Semitic directly. One reason for this seems to be that the study of Semitic had progressed far beyond that of "Hamitic" or Afroasiatic. According to Albert Cuny, who accepted the validity of the Hamito-Semitic grouping: n the Semitic field, the exact knowledge that now exists... makes it possible to deal with questions of vocalism as well as in the field of Indo-European. This is the justification for the present study. A new departure was represented by the first installment of Vladislav Illich-Svitych's Nostratic dictionary in 1971, edited by Vladimir Dybo after Illich-Svitych's untimely death.

Rather than comparing Indo-European to Semitic, Illich-Svitych compared it to Afroasiatic directly, using his reconstruction of Afroasiatic phonology. This approach has been taken subsequently by other Nostraticists. In the 1980s, some linguists, notably Joseph Greenberg and Sergei Starostin, began to identify Afroasiatic as a language family more ancient than Indo-European, directly related not to Indo-European but to an earlier grouping from which Indo-European was descended, which Greenberg termed Eurasiatic; this view has been accepted including Allan Bomhard. The Indo-Semitic hypothesis has thus undergone a paradigm shift. From Lepsius in 1836 through the mid-20th century, the question asked was whether Indo-European and Semitic are related or unrelated, in attempting to answer this question Indo-European and Semitic were compared directly; this now appears naive, the relevant units of comparison instead appear to be

Oak Tree National

Oak Tree National called Oak Tree Golf Club, is a golf and country club located in the Oklahoma City suburb of Edmond, Oklahoma. The course was designed by Pete Dye, it opened in 1976, it plays to a par 71. Like other courses in Oklahoma, Oak Tree is a windy course and can have winds of at least 30 miles per hour, it is located on hilly terrain, uneven lies are common from the fairway or rough. The greens are difficult to hit well, are undulating enough to make any par tough. In its 2015–16 listing of the best golf courses by state, Golf Digest ranked Oak Tree National #51 in their Americas 100 Greatest Golf Courses, they ranked it second in the state of Oklahoma. The course was redesigned by Pete Dye in 2002; the course measures 6,873 yards from the championship tees. However, for the 2006 Senior PGA Championship, the course played to 7,102 yards. Oak Tree has Bent grass for the greens, Bermuda grass for the fairways. Water comes into play on 13 of the 18 holes; the course and slope rating is 79.3/155 from the tournament tees and 76.4/153 from the championship tees.

Each hole has its own name, some holes are named after famous courses or golf holes. The signature hole is the fifth hole, a 592-yard par five where players must avoid the oak tree, used in the club's logo. Other notable holes include par three with water down the entire left side; the tenth hole is a tight par four. The 13th hole is named due after a postage stamp. Golfers liken landing a ball on the green to landing a ball on a space the size of a postage stamp. Oak Tree is the home course of several PGA Tour or PGA Tour Champions players: David Edwards, Mark Hayes, Gil Morgan, Doug Tewell, Bob Tway, Scott Verplank, Willie Wood, Kevin Tway, Rhein Gibson. Female Professional Golfer: Sydney Cox Bolded years are major championships on the PGA Tour. Oak Tree has hosted a major championship and a senior major championship in addition to numerous other PGA of America championships and one United States Golf Association-sanctioned championship; the first notable tournament to be held at Oak Tree was the 1984 U.

S. Amateur, won by Scott Verplank. In 1988, the PGA Championship came to Oak Tree. Jeff Sluman won with a score of twelve under par 272, clinched with a final round 65. In 2000, the PGA Club Professional Championship was held at Oak Tree. Most in 2006, the Senior PGA Championship was held at Oak Tree. Over the four days, gusty winds kept scores under par. Jay Haas defeated Brad Bryant in a playoff with a final score of five under par. Oak Tree hosted the 2014 U. S. Senior Open, won by Colin Montgomerie. Oak Tree has been criticized for having a noose hang off of a tree to the left of the green on the par five sixteenth hole. A columnist from The Oklahoman criticized it as a possible symbol of racism in an October 2004 column, it was removed soon after, well before the 2006 Senior PGA Championship. It was placed there by a golfer who had struggled on the hole. Oak Tree was to have hosted the 1994 PGA Championship. However, it was moved to Southern Hills Country Club in Tulsa because of the club's filing Chapter 11 bankruptcy in 1990.

On, it was publicized that Oak Tree had few or no minority or women members in its membership. This further caused the PGA of America to move the tournament to Southern Hills. Oak Tree National Oak Tree Country Club