Differences between MA/DT/SD/H2H/Etc...

[Indie12]

I'm sure we've had this debate before, but coming from another forum and viewing (and debateing with) another gentlemen's opinon on the matter, I though I'd put it up for a re-debate or discussion.

In YOUR opinion, what are the differences between (IF ANY) Martial Arts, Defensive Tactics, Self Defense, Hand 2 Hand Combat, Etc...?
Are their truly any differences?
Do they all stem from Martial Art Based theories, training, techniques, concepts, etc?
Is there a difference between Martial Arts and Self Defense Techniques OR Martial Arts and Defensive Tactics techniques, OR Martial Arts and Hand2Hand Combat techniques? Or are they all based on the same techniques?

 

[Cyriacus]

Realistically, the Terms should be Interchangeable.

Its complicated. Im going to favor Replying to Replies, here.
Theyre all based on the same Idea. Everything else is subjective to the Organisation itself.

 

[Indie12]

Realistically, the Terms should be Interchangeable.

Its complicated. Im going to favor Replying to Replies, here.
Theyre all based on the same Idea. Everything else is subjective to the Organisation itself.

I agree, they truly are interchangeable. Which is why I wonder sometimes how people define them differently?

 

[Cyriacus]

I agree, they truly are interchangeable. Which is why I wonder sometimes how people define them differently?

For the same reason why TMA and MMA (As in, Modern Martial Arts) need to be distunguished, when many MMA are just an adapted TMA System. Kajukenbo, for example. An MMA that operates in a TMA manner, but which is by all means an MMA.

EDIT: As in, they DONT need to be distinguished.

 

[Indie12]

For the same reason why TMA and MMA (As in, Modern Martial Arts) need to be distunguished, when many MMA are just an adapted TMA System. Kajukenbo, for example. An MMA that operates in a TMA manner, but which is by all means an MMA.

EDIT: As in, they DONT need to be distinguished.

'Modern Martial Arts (MMA)' now that's a term you don't hear too often, (least I don't). A majority of the 'MMA' you hear or talk about refers to 'Mixed Martial Arts (MMA), which is different.

I agree completely with that!

 

[Blindside]

Is there a difference between Martial Arts and Self Defense Techniques OR Martial Arts and Defensive Tactics techniques, OR Martial Arts and Hand2Hand Combat techniques? Or are they all based on the same techniques?

I define "Martial Arts" as having to do with war, so "war arts." So this includes a whole category of training that modern self-defense simply doesn't require, the training and experience on running logistics for a unit/army is a martial art. The operation of a M2 or M4 or F-18 are also "martial arts" that don't fall into categories that I would classify as either defensive tactics or hand to hand combat techniques.

As we get down to close range combat then clearly there are overlaps, but there are a couple of distinctions. "Defensive Tactics" is usually a term associated with LEO training in their duties to protect themselves and others, and may involve heavy training in a use of force continuum that is not as emphasized in the war arts. How many Marines do you see kitted with OC spray and tasers? Clearly there is a different focus in their training. But there is overlap as well, the urban warfare techniques of that Marine unit and a SWAT team stacking a door may be essentially identical, and both are also not really part of what I would consider "self-defense" or "self-protection" techniques. To differentiate between DT and "hand-to-hand," there are procedures in place for the LEO that won't be in place for the civilian, how to safely handcuff someone is not a typical civilian training procedure.

I consider "self-defense/protection" training to consist of a range of physical and non-physical training for protection of the individual. Knowing about how to defuse an aggressive social confrontation or about keeping your awareness up about the world around you are all parts of that training. The training for hand-to-hand combat or close quarters combat is just that, training in the striking/grappling/counter-weapon/weapon use at relatively close range, you can train for this and forgo other important parts of self-defense training, but by itself it does not qualify as "self-defense" training, but it may be part of it.

And again there are overlaps, handgun operation between a civilian training for "self-defense," a LEO, or a member of the military may be identical, so is their standing armbar or elbow strike.

 

[punisher73]

"Martial arts" is such a broad term. It is used for any skill set that relates to war. But, usually when the term is said people are referring to an asian system of combat whether empty hand or weapon. Some will still use the term for western weapons arts, and even more recently are putting western wrestling and boxing into the mix.

As to the other terms, Defensive tactics, H2H, and combatives. They are all derived from the empty hand systems of martial arts. Sometimes they use the terms for the target audience and environment that they are to be used in. For example, DT usually refers to the methods used by law enforcement and combatives refer to the methods used by soldiers in war. Even h2h is a catch all for empty handed fighting done by police or soldiers.

But, ALL of those terms are under the umbrella of martial arts.

 

[MJS]

I'm sure we've had this debate before, but coming from another forum and viewing (and debateing with) another gentlemen's opinon on the matter, I though I'd put it up for a re-debate or discussion.

In YOUR opinion, what are the differences between (IF ANY) Martial Arts, Defensive Tactics, Self Defense, Hand 2 Hand Combat, Etc...?
Are their truly any differences?
Do they all stem from Martial Art Based theories, training, techniques, concepts, etc?
Is there a difference between Martial Arts and Self Defense Techniques OR Martial Arts and Defensive Tactics techniques, OR Martial Arts and Hand2Hand Combat techniques? Or are they all based on the same techniques?

I'd say there are alot of similarities and alot of differences. I'm not going to list each similarity/difference seperate, but instead, make an overall generalization. IMHO, I'd say the major difference is the path that each takes. The end result, for the most part, is the same....to survive an encounter. Each most likely has the same kicks, punches, and blocks, however, the way they're trained and applied will vary. MAs are probably the only one out of the list, that has things like kata and certain traditions, that depending on the art, will need to be followed.

Application...like I said, that will vary. Some MAs tend to be static, almost robot like, whereas H2H/RBSD may include more boxing type drills. The MAs may not be as open to looking outside the art, for other ways to do things, yet the other things you listed probably will. Take a little from BJJ, a little from Krav, a little here and there, mix it all up, but a strict TMA may not want to do that.

So, like I said, the goals are most likely the same, but slight differences will be there with the others.

 

[jks9199]

Think of a pyramid. The base is the widest, deepest study of the subject, and that's martial arts. It can encompass lots of things, some of which may have no real function, but serve simply to preserve an idea or concept. Whether it works or not doesn't really matter; the beauty and flow and completeness of the motion is important. (This doesn't mean that someone training in martial arts is ineffective, only that they have the widest scope.)

Moving to a smaller tier, we have martial sports. Here, we lose some of the pretty stuff, and weight what we keep by whether it serves us well in the competitive arena. If our competition is in forms or kata, we'll sacrifice some combative principles to add some showmanship. Or we'll shape our stances or techniques around the rule set we're playing under. If that's no punches to the head, we don't practice them. If it's light contact with an emphasis on speed to get in and "count coup" -- that's what we'll work on. The techniques may not be combatively effective -- but they work in the arena they're designed for.

Climbing a bit more, to an even tighter level, we have police/security DT and similar approaches. There are goals here beyond mere survival; subduing the bad guy, containing, controlling, and cuffing the bad guy. Or maybe it's holding and controlling a patient so that they can be treated without harming them more than absolutely necessary. We've moved into the real world -- but we still have some rules, too. The goal here is often simple techniques that are easily taught and easily retained with minimal practice, and a high likelihood of successful application.

The smallest tier is self defense. Military Hand-to-hand, civilian self defense... The rules are pretty much out the window. Techniques here are quick, brutal, and the sole criteria is effectiveness. The goal is to dominate an attacker or fighting situation and escape with your hide intact.

 

[Chris Parker]

I'm sure we've had this debate before, but coming from another forum and viewing (and debateing with) another gentlemen's opinon on the matter, I though I'd put it up for a re-debate or discussion.

In YOUR opinion, what are the differences between (IF ANY) Martial Arts, Defensive Tactics, Self Defense, Hand 2 Hand Combat, Etc...?
Are their truly any differences?

They can be very different, and are not really interchangable at all, unless you don't understand what they refer to.

Do they all stem from Martial Art Based theories, training, techniques, concepts, etc?

No, although many do. But first you'd need to come to some understanding of what the term martial art refers to, really.

Is there a difference between Martial Arts and Self Defense Techniques OR Martial Arts and Defensive Tactics techniques, OR Martial Arts and Hand2Hand Combat techniques? Or are they all based on the same techniques?

Yes there are differences in each case, ranging from subtle and relatively small to gigantic gaps between them, depending on exactly what you're looking at as specific examples of each.

MARTIAL ARTS: A systematic approach to combat based around usage in a specific environment, with the techniques being expressions of the philosophy (values and beliefs) of the system itself. Such values and beliefs can range enormously, as can the environment the system is designed for, ranging from purely unarmed, grappling only tournaments with specific rule-sets, to medieval combat with archaic weapons, from single ranges to multi ranged combat, from almost pacifist approaches through to practically cold-blooded murder in their intent. Some key factors, though, include the idea of martial arts being longer-term studies, with a number of years (at least) being needed to be dedicated to get past the simple idea of "here's how you do this kick", hence not being ideal for security, military, or self defence, as each of these require immediate results rather than gradual development of a deeper skill set.

SELF DEFENCE TECHNIQUES: Hmm, I"m not fond of these concepts to begin with... Self defence isn't really about the techniques, it's more abour awareness and education. But, that said, many do just look at physical techniques and label that as "self defence", so let's look at that. As noted in the Martial Art description, self defence needs to be immediately applicable, which lends itself to simple, direct, gross motor actions which remove advantages of size and strength. Targets are typically soft and difficult (or impossible) to build up for protection (eyes, groin, complex joints like ankles or the knee). Most typically, a "self defence" course lasts a total of about 8-10 hours, which might be over a day, a weekend, or 1-2 hour long classes over a few weeks. At that point the martial art is just beginning, but the self defence course is finished.

DEFENSIVE TACTICS: DefTac approaches are closer to the "self defence" course listed above. Again, the aim is a developed skill in a short amount of time, but the potential audience is more likely to be LEO's, Security, or Military, where there is a small amount of time allotted to training, and the best result in that time is required. Unlike the self defence course, which will try to cover a wide range of possible personal assaults, DefTac training is more likely to be an intensive training course on a single, or reduced aspect, such as use of a particular tool (baton), or a particular scenario (knife assault). It is commonly a small number of principles taught, rather that "techniques", which can then be adapted to the situation or environment the practitioner might find themselves in. Training tends to involve a lot of repetition of basic drills, all exploring the same principles.

HAND2HAND COMBATIVES: This is typically a Military term, especially with the suffix "combatives", and was commonly used from WWI-WWII and beyond. Most commonly today it is used to refer to the WWII form, such as the methods of Fairbairn or Applegate. It was used to differentiate between close-quarters combat and rifle combat, really. The aim was to look for pure efficacy of technique, and, to be frank, it didn't have much more of a base than Fairbairn's and Applegate's (and others) personal talent, understanding, and experience. While the Hand2Hand aspect specifically referred to unarmed methods, including striking, throwing, choking, and more, it also tended to include close quarters weapons such as knives as well. To differentiate this from martial arts, all you need to do is look to martial art weaponry systems, such as Kenjutsu, Escrima, Kyudo, and so on. Hardly "hand to hand".

But when it all comes down to it, I think you're approaching this from the wrong direction. You're looking just at the 'technique' side of things, which is really just the expression of the real differences. The reason DefTac methods are different to Combative methods, which are different to Martial Art methods, which are different to Self Defence methods is down to what they are aiming to achieve, rather than just being a collection of mechanical techniques in the first place. The question is really if the training methods are different, as that is where the techniques come from, and give the techniques their context for you to understand them in the first place.

 

[Indie12]

They can be very different, and are not really interchangable at all, unless you don't understand what they refer to.



No, although many do. But first you'd need to come to some understanding of what the term martial art refers to, really.



Yes there are differences in each case, ranging from subtle and relatively small to gigantic gaps between them, depending on exactly what you're looking at as specific examples of each.

MARTIAL ARTS: A systematic approach to combat based around usage in a specific environment, with the techniques being expressions of the philosophy (values and beliefs) of the system itself. Such values and beliefs can range enormously, as can the environment the system is designed for, ranging from purely unarmed, grappling only tournaments with specific rule-sets, to medieval combat with archaic weapons, from single ranges to multi ranged combat, from almost pacifist approaches through to practically cold-blooded murder in their intent. Some key factors, though, include the idea of martial arts being longer-term studies, with a number of years (at least) being needed to be dedicated to get past the simple idea of "here's how you do this kick", hence not being ideal for security, military, or self defence, as each of these require immediate results rather than gradual development of a deeper skill set.

SELF DEFENCE TECHNIQUES: Hmm, I"m not fond of these concepts to begin with... Self defence isn't really about the techniques, it's more abour awareness and education. But, that said, many do just look at physical techniques and label that as "self defence", so let's look at that. As noted in the Martial Art description, self defence needs to be immediately applicable, which lends itself to simple, direct, gross motor actions which remove advantages of size and strength. Targets are typically soft and difficult (or impossible) to build up for protection (eyes, groin, complex joints like ankles or the knee). Most typically, a "self defence" course lasts a total of about 8-10 hours, which might be over a day, a weekend, or 1-2 hour long classes over a few weeks. At that point the martial art is just beginning, but the self defence course is finished.

DEFENSIVE TACTICS: DefTac approaches are closer to the "self defence" course listed above. Again, the aim is a developed skill in a short amount of time, but the potential audience is more likely to be LEO's, Security, or Military, where there is a small amount of time allotted to training, and the best result in that time is required. Unlike the self defence course, which will try to cover a wide range of possible personal assaults, DefTac training is more likely to be an intensive training course on a single, or reduced aspect, such as use of a particular tool (baton), or a particular scenario (knife assault). It is commonly a small number of principles taught, rather that "techniques", which can then be adapted to the situation or environment the practitioner might find themselves in. Training tends to involve a lot of repetition of basic drills, all exploring the same principles.

HAND2HAND COMBATIVES: This is typically a Military term, especially with the suffix "combatives", and was commonly used from WWI-WWII and beyond. Most commonly today it is used to refer to the WWII form, such as the methods of Fairbairn or Applegate. It was used to differentiate between close-quarters combat and rifle combat, really. The aim was to look for pure efficacy of technique, and, to be frank, it didn't have much more of a base than Fairbairn's and Applegate's (and others) personal talent, understanding, and experience. While the Hand2Hand aspect specifically referred to unarmed methods, including striking, throwing, choking, and more, it also tended to include close quarters weapons such as knives as well. To differentiate this from martial arts, all you need to do is look to martial art weaponry systems, such as Kenjutsu, Escrima, Kyudo, and so on. Hardly "hand to hand".

But when it all comes down to it, I think you're approaching this from the wrong direction. You're looking just at the 'technique' side of things, which is really just the expression of the real differences. The reason DefTac methods are different to Combative methods, which are different to Martial Art methods, which are different to Self Defence methods is down to what they are aiming to achieve, rather than just being a collection of mechanical techniques in the first place. The question is really if the training methods are different, as that is where the techniques come from, and give the techniques their context for you to understand them in the first place.

Negative, Chris. I was referring to an overall similarities and differences between them all. I disagree with you on your assessment!! But what you wrote in your response in the "definitions" pretty much reinforces what the question above was asking. That is, is their any differences, and according to what you wrote, basically there's not! But please correct me if that's inaccurate!

And yes, I do know the differences and understandings, (in my opinion), and I've been doing this for quite a while and in different arenas!!

Keep em coming!

 

[Chris Parker]

You may want to re-read it, then, as there are some very big differences between each of the different categorisations.... after all, that's why there are different categories....

 

[Indie12]

You may want to re-read it, then, as there are some very big differences between each of the different categorisations.... after all, that's why there are different categories....

I have read them and if your talking concepts, then yes! But in general and technique wise, negative!

Here's a run down of (in my opinion) the concepts:
MA- systematic approach to armed or unarmed combat.
SD- General application, concept, and method of defending against attacks and surviving encounters.
DT- (Depending on which one your talking about) is either Military, Law Enforcement, or Civilian, and deals with different elements of Physical, Mental, and Legal applications of Physical force.
H2H- Either Military, Law Enfocement, or Civilian approach to unarmed or armed combat, I.E. Killing, or severe bodily harm! (For example, Krav Maga, MCMAP, MACP, Or Martial Arts)

So, In my opinion and in short, basically they are all under the same umbrella in terms of general category. "Martial Arts"

I will also add, that your definition is either by pre 1960 hand2hand combatives, which is a little different than todays combatives programs. Rex Applegate's h2h program is still used to this day, although it has been updated to fit today's needs by US Military.

 

[Buka]

There are differences, yes. As in apples and oranges - both being fruit.

Th term "Defensive Tactics", at least as I know it, only applies to Law Enforcement. It is an animal all to it's own. The dangers in DT do not end with the threat, they end with your written report, which can be even more dangerous than the bad guy you just dealt with. There are more rules associated with Defensive Tactics than with any art I've seen or heard of.

As for the term "Martial Arts" - Tai-Chi and MMA are both Martial Arts. While they might have related principles, they're about as different as different can be. BJJ, Tae-kwon-do and boxing are all fighting arts, but, again, as different as it gets.

As for Hand to Hand Combat, I believe the proper term would be marriage.

 

[Chris Parker]

In general, yes, they're different. In terms of technique, well, as I said, I think you're looking at it backwards there.... but, again, yes, they're different. Let's look at them from a purely technical standpoint, if you insist....

MARTIAL ARTS: Technically, the exact approach to technical aspects depends entirely on the martial art itself, but there will be a greater presence of fine motor techniques, skill building techniques (techniques not designed for combative excellence or even effectiveness, really), as opposed to each other category mentioned. Also, depending on the system, the techniques may very easily be deliberately over-done (by todays legal standards and social violence standards), with broken bones or lethal responses to attacks such as a simple single or double hand grab, or, in some arts I know, you simply walk up to someone and kill them.

Additionally, the martial art in question will have it's technical make up defined by it's history, it's environment, and more. Japanese arts will tend towards grappling, Chinese and Korean towards striking and kicking, the types of targets approached, the types of strikes used, the types of kicks used, the types of weaponry encountered, and far more move this category the furthest from each of the others.

SELF DEFENCE TECHNIQUES: As I said, these will be geared towards gross motor, as opposed to the martial arts approach having both gross motor and fine motor, and will have a primary technical approach of creating damage in order to escape, not kill or attack. Techniques are unrefined (from a martial art standpoint), relying on "survival instincts" and attacks towards soft targets. This is very different to a martial art technical approach.

DEFENSIVE TACTICS: DefTacs programs don't tend towards "techniques" at all, really, other than to drill the principles which is what DefTacs training is all about. From a technical standpoint, the tendancy is towards gross motor again, and can be more "aggressive" than the self defence forms. Being geared up for military, police, and security, escape isn't the high priority, so the technical approach is to be more pro-active in most cases. That again changes the types of techniques preferred here.

HAND2HAND COMBATIVES: This is probably the closest to the martial art approach, as it can deal with more lethal approaches (again, though, that depends on the martial art in question...), but is still not a martial arts approach. It is more realistically a collection of almost random techniques, all chosen to suit what are felt to be common situations and conditions. It can be similar or different, really, with no way to definitively say one way or the other.

Really, the big difference is in the aims of each category, as that leads to the differences in technical approaches. You might as well ask if all martial arts use the same techniques, honestly. It really is looking at it backwards.

 

[Indie12]

There are differences, yes. As in apples and oranges - both being fruit.

Th term "Defensive Tactics", at least as I know it, only applies to Law Enforcement. It is an animal all to it's own. The dangers in DT do not end with the threat, they end with your written report, which can be even more dangerous than the bad guy you just dealt with. There are more rules associated with Defensive Tactics than with any art I've seen or heard of.

As for the term "Martial Arts" - Tai-Chi and MMA are both Martial Arts. While they might have related principles, they're about as different as different can be. BJJ, Tae-kwon-do and boxing are all fighting arts, but, again, as different as it gets.

As for Hand to Hand Combat, I believe the proper term would be marriage.

Concept wise, yes technically, but not really technique wise.

Defensive Tactics mainly refers to Law Enforcement, but can also refer to Military, Security, Corrections, Fire/EMS, Courts, and other governmental and city entities. Yes, the paperwork is a hassle!!

 

[Indie12]

In general, yes, they're different. In terms of technique, well, as I said, I think you're looking at it backwards there.... but, again, yes, they're different. Let's look at them from a purely technical standpoint, if you insist....

MARTIAL ARTS: Technically, the exact approach to technical aspects depends entirely on the martial art itself, but there will be a greater presence of fine motor techniques, skill building techniques (techniques not designed for combative excellence or even effectiveness, really), as opposed to each other category mentioned. Also, depending on the system, the techniques may very easily be deliberately over-done (by todays legal standards and social violence standards), with broken bones or lethal responses to attacks such as a simple single or double hand grab, or, in some arts I know, you simply walk up to someone and kill them.

Additionally, the martial art in question will have it's technical make up defined by it's history, it's environment, and more. Japanese arts will tend towards grappling, Chinese and Korean towards striking and kicking, the types of targets approached, the types of strikes used, the types of kicks used, the types of weaponry encountered, and far more move this category the furthest from each of the others.

SELF DEFENCE TECHNIQUES: As I said, these will be geared towards gross motor, as opposed to the martial arts approach having both gross motor and fine motor, and will have a primary technical approach of creating damage in order to escape, not kill or attack. Techniques are unrefined (from a martial art standpoint), relying on "survival instincts" and attacks towards soft targets. This is very different to a martial art technical approach.

DEFENSIVE TACTICS: DefTacs programs don't tend towards "techniques" at all, really, other than to drill the principles which is what DefTacs training is all about. From a technical standpoint, the tendancy is towards gross motor again, and can be more "aggressive" than the self defence forms. Being geared up for military, police, and security, escape isn't the high priority, so the technical approach is to be more pro-active in most cases. That again changes the types of techniques preferred here.

HAND2HAND COMBATIVES: This is probably the closest to the martial art approach, as it can deal with more lethal approaches (again, though, that depends on the martial art in question...), but is still not a martial arts approach. It is more realistically a collection of almost random techniques, all chosen to suit what are felt to be common situations and conditions. It can be similar or different, really, with no way to definitively say one way or the other.

Really, the big difference is in the aims of each category, as that leads to the differences in technical approaches. You might as well ask if all martial arts use the same techniques, honestly. It really is looking at it backwards.

Like I said if your speaking from a concept basis, I suppose. But I was referring to an overall similarities and differences. Im not sure what you mean by backwards in this case?

Again, here are the main similarities and differences, (if your using concepts, I suppose)

Martial Arts- Systematic approach to unarmed or armed combat, or sport)

Defensive Tactics- Legal, Medical, Tactical approach to physical control or restraint, or survival- in other words they provide not only motor skills and 'know hows' to restraining and control or disable, using the 'Use of Force' approach, they also teach physical restraint with legal implications. It depends on which organization, agency, or program you use. Basically the idea is to learn physical, legal, and tactical approaches to get a subject under control and then being able to justify those reasons through documentation.

Self Defense- Physical method of protecting oneself or others using physical force. This can be done in short period (1-4 hours) or long term periods (1-3 months)

H2H- Combat, Disable, or Killing.

Gross Motor Skills can be found in any of these categories. But if your talking about categories as in "differences/similarities" yeah they can all be under the "Martial Art" umbrella, since they all use Martial Art principles.

Just for the record: I've done Defensive Tactics, Self Defense, Martial Arts, and H2H training. There really are more similiarities, then differences! Although, I will give you that there are differences!

Again, I'm not sure what your referring to as backwards here? The differences in techniques aren't all different. Concepts, slightly.

 

[Chris Parker]

By "backwards" I mean that the differences in technical approaches isn't the point, it's the result of the actual differences. If you're looking at technical differences, then you've really missed the point. Additionally, what self defence program are you talking about? Which H2H methodology? Which DefTac program? And which martial art? There are gigantic differences within each category, with the broadest being found in the martial arts category.

I'll put it this way, what do you mean by "martial art"?

This?

Or this?

Maybe this?

So how about this?

Then we have this...

Or this....

How about this?

Or this perhaps?

Maybe this?

Honestly, I can keep going with more and more varied technical approaches to martial arts here, so without a base for comparison, there's really little that can be said. Except that, by dirnt of their different requirements, each of the different categories will have different technical approaches. It's just a matter of how well you can recognise that. After all, a punch is not just a punch when dealing with these types of discussions....

 

[Indie12]

Well like I said, I wasn't using any specifics, I was being general or broad! If you want specifics, go ahead and PM me.

 

[Chris Parker]

No, it doesn't work that way. You brought this question into a public forum, questions such as what exactly you had or have in mind as your construct of "martial arts" or otherwise should be answered in public as well. A PM conversation adds nothing to the thread, the discussion, the forum, or actual communication, honestly. Same with your request of PM responses to your question on BJJ's "Guard" position. For a public forum, you really should be prepared to answer questions publicly, otherwise I'd suggest not bothering.